Sweden Defence budget proposition 2007 - some info

[signatory]

http://www.mil.se/images/vapen/mil_vapen.gif
The Budget proposition is what the military hands in to the Government, they can object to certain ideas but normally overall operations will be approved.
http://www.mil.se/index.php?lang=S&c=news&id=32288

Not many surprises but I wanted to type a little before the media falsely report something: I add freely from the text...

Key changes:


Airpower: The airforce is to maintain an operational fleet of 100 JAS39 Gripen C/D versions with NATO interoperability. That means a reduction in the total number of jets in active inventory but 31 jets of A/B standard will be upgraded. The remaining A/B jets will be placed in export support.

http://www.gripen.com/images/200.1b9e7fcfd57a30f468000288/Gripen_P_G_2002_11.jpg

Gripen will perform Air Defense, Ground attack, EW, Recon. Continuation of required training and weapons systems not already in place will be introduced, including precision guided bombs and further Recon and CAS training with other elements of the Armed forces.

Gripen demonstrator project with new future technology will be economically supported by the military in cooperation with SAAB, and also part of the export support. (NORA/AESA/MSI etc)

After 2008 the Airforce and Marine units is to take a larger role in International peace support missions. KFOR contribution by the Army is likely to be reduced as a result.

Participation in the nEURON project, the Gripen demonstrator project, a joint commonality in C/D versions will make the platform and future versions economically and system viable all the way to 2040.

Airborn command & Control IS340 and air control ASC890 group.

Electronic Warfare and PSYOPS units to continue their structuring for the NBG 08. (EU Nordic Battle Group)

C-130 AMP upgrade finished. Strategic airlift capability to be arranged.

Land forces:

The main goal is to provide a high readiness and bang for the buck in the area of armed warfare be it of international or national concern. As a result saving from cuts in static administration will be put towards operations.

Tactical UAV to be introduced

Helicopters HKP 14 (NH90) and HKP 15 (Augusta 109) will be introduced with priority on Troop transportation and 2 of each modified for Special Operations.

Continuation in supporting ISAF North.

Proposed international support in central Africa great lakes region.

Modernisation of 155mm SPG. Continuation of future Artillery organisation (Archer) and cooperation with Denmark on this issue.

http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/8238/page72stridsvagn122icon6zp.jpg

Armored units will reorganise into a modular concept, depending on situational need and airlift capability etc the exact right formation will be utilized.
Stridsvagn 122 is now used in training at P4, P7 and I19 together with CV90.

New urban warfare facilities with more training in this area.

International capability will be 5 operations at the same time.

Units available for National and International emergency will be in readiness 0-30 days, supported by units with lower readiness 30-360 days.

NBG 08 will be put in Readiness 10 starting January 1 2008 for independant strike capability within 6000km radius from Brussels.

R&D:

175 million SEK reduction in Defence research budget 2007

Navy:

http://www.kockums.se/News/photostock/Resources/smallvisby2.jpeg

2 Visby class corvettes will be introduced into the marine units 2007 with training on Surface, ASW and mine hunting capability, to assume full readiness in 2008.

Modernization of 4 submarines, one sub the HMS Halland to be decommisioned.

Mine-hunting ships entering MTU under Koster programme.

.....
The primary demand for now is to have a high readiness with operative units.

The Armed forces shall in consultation with the government and parliament, if the world situation deteriorate to the worse, be ready to swiftly expand military capability to meet any threat to the sovereignty and independence of the nation.

------
Well just wrote off memory after reading the paper.. I missed a lot I bet, but the point was to get down the overall relative stuff. Sorry abt typos etc.

[Luno]

signatory That for the info mate :)
I didn’t find any info on the HV but i don’t think it gone be any big changes

[signatory]

signatory That for the info mate :)
I didn’t find any info on the HV but i don’t think it gone be any big changes

np :)

Ah yes not much change... they continue with giving the HV/Home Guard (National guard) Added capability in ground surveillance, NBC, Traffic/road knowledge. New education system, whatever that means.

As for the whole organisation they are mentioned in the following appendix's...

http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/621/org1da.jpg

Hemlig = Classified

Doh! :)

[Resurrection]

Great stuff signatory, very informative. I'd like to see what kind of solution they come up with for the strategic airlift problem.

[Luno]

np :)

Ah yes not much change... they continue with giving the HV/Home Guard (National guard) Added capability in ground surveillance, NBC, Traffic/road knowledge. New education system, whatever that means.

As for the whole organisation they are mentioned in the following appendix's...

http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/621/org1da.jpg

Hemlig = Classified

Doh! :)

Cool MUST is going to hunt you down for posting that :)

[signatory]

Cool MUST is going to hunt you down for posting that :)

Mehehe I didn't post anything secret so they are most welcome

---
@ Res, yep I agree. I'd be happy with anything... :) hm, can the C-17 carry Strv122 ?

[Resurrection]

@ Res, yep I agree. I'd be happy with anything... :) hm, can the C-17 carry Strv122 ?

Pretty sure it can. :)

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/6159/globe82vd.jpg

[signatory]

Ohh nice! I was worried it wouldn't be wide enough for the strv122 but it looks like there's plenty of room to spare and the Strv122 is only 10 cm wider or something.

[Luno]

Swedish government are gone destroy 100 Jas 39 Gripen if they don’t find a buyer for them . i hope not it gone happen but i really don’t trust the government after the PBV 501 scandal :cantbeli:

link sorry only in swedish
http://aftonbladet.se/vss/nyheter/story/0,2789,815521,00.html

[signatory]

Swedish government are gone destroy 100 Jas 39 Gripen if they don’t find a buyer for them . i hope not it gone happen but i really don’t trust the government after the PBV 501 scandal :cantbeli:

link sorry only in swedish
http://aftonbladet.se/vss/nyheter/story/0,2789,815521,00.html

Heh. Not a correct translation.
Read again or re-read my text or the link on mil.se p-)


Airpower: The airforce is to maintain an operational fleet of 100 JAS39 Gripen C/D versions with NATO interoperability. That means a reduction in the total number of jets in active inventory but 31 jets of A/B standard will be upgraded. The remaining A/B jets will be placed in export support.

I told ya.. media was going to make a big deal out of this. There will be about 60-70 jets available for export support down from an earlier worst case estimation of ~100 jets but it will be fewer now since 31 will be upgraded.

(the 60-70 (delivered between 1993-1999) can be sold, leased, offered as training jets, in support of a foreign Gripen C/D customer, etc etc etc there are many nations that would love the A/B jets and don't require NATO interoperability..and if they need it, it's not difficult to add) Talk about destruction is so far in the future it's just silly to mention it.. and that's only if they are not distributed world-wide, which should not be a problem. The upgrade of A/B's and phasing out of surplus will not happen over-night either, deliveries of C/D is still going on. And we haven't actively "used" 150-200 jets in the airforce for a long time.

They want to make it seem like we wasted money on jets while we're actually going to receive more of the capable ones.

Wasting money would be to have a large stockpile of A/B jets and few C/D jets. (As the Czech and Hungarian lease cut deep into the C/D inventory this is actually a good decision, instead of having 56 C/D jets we will have 100 C/D that we can actually use for something. The A/B's we have are almost worthless for most UN/EU/NATO jobs and technology wise almost a whole other jet than the C/D's all from fuel consumption, performance, weapons load, refueling etc)

[futurepilot2004]

If you could give us a few Gripens for free, that would be great :)

[Fredrik]

(the 60-70 (delivered between 1993-1999) can be sold, leased, offered as training jets, in support of a foreign Gripen C/D customer, etc etc etc there are many nations that would love the A/B jets and don't require NATO interoperability..and if they need it, it's not difficult to add) Talk about destruction is so far in the future it's just silly to mention it.. and that's only if they are not distributed world-wide, which should not be a problem. The upgrade of A/B's and phasing out of surplus will not happen over-night either, deliveries of C/D is still going on. And we haven't actively "used" 150-200 jets in the airforce for a long time.

They want to make it seem like we wasted money on jets while we're actually going to receive more of the capable ones.Actually the possibility of scrapping surplus gripens is mentioned on page 33, and if for some reason we would have problems exporting some of the surplus aircraft it is better to scrap them than have them collecting dust in some storage facility.
But I agree, statements like that of Lars Ångström (said on the radio that this is pure destruction of capital, and that tose who placed the orders for these planes in the first place should be held accountable)are beyond stupid, it is the recent reductions done in the defence that makes these planes surplus. If anyone should be held accountable he is as good candidate as anyone.

[signatory]

Actually the possibility of scrapping surplus gripens is mentioned on page 33, and if for some reason we would have problems exporting some of the surplus aircraft it is better to scrap them than have them collecting dust in some storage facility.

Yeah I've seen it in the budget text and see nothing wrong with it, I didn't say it wasn't a possibility just silly to talk about since it's unrealistic, especially silly as a headline.
And those are the only options, sell or scrap. Like you say. I mean jesus, there are countries buying and selling mig-21/F-7 and F-5 and old F-16's around the world almost every month...

And either way, if not "now" they would be removed in the Mid-life upgrade anyway. The commonality new happen sooner. The undecided old plan was for a fleet of 100 Gripen E/F by ~ the year 2020. (A combination of upgraded A/B/C/D)

(E/F is semi-fictional name, but assumed to be the name for the mid-life upgrade and new export version using the same parts)


But I agree, statements like that of Lars Ångström (said on the radio that this is pure destruction of capital, and that tose who placed the orders for these planes in the first place should be held accountable)are beyond stupid, it is the recent reductions done in the defence that makes these planes surplus. If anyone should be held accountable he is as good candidate as anyone.

Exactly. Sigh, the first 5 jets was ordered in 1982.. 30 jets in 1983... so sorry we didn't invent a crystal ball as how that whole collapse of the USSR would pan out... 110 jets ordered in 1992. Oops, we joined the EU in 1995... well none of these jets were NATO compatible, and then suddenly the military is supposed to assume a new role in EU/NATO... with equipment not ready for it. God damn politicians!

[Resurrection]

Fp: Offer Baltic countries the surplus JAS 39 jets.

http://www.folkpartiet.se/FPTemplates/PressReleaseListing____14370.aspx?pkID=39003

[signatory]

Fp: Offer Baltic countries the surplus JAS 39 jets.

http://www.folkpartiet.se/FPTemplates/PressReleaseListing____14370.aspx?pkID=39003

Nice idea but practically expensive. Modification to NATO standard and building a non existing airforce capability including training and command & control with all the personell that has to come with it.

I'm not against it, I have suggested in the past that the Baltic countries (and other Nordic countries) could utilize the flight school in Sweden as Czech, South African and Hungarian pilots do and use Gotland as a side-base. But it's a much larger project than one might think. Jets are the easy part. I wouldn't mind a joint Baltic-NATO-Swedish financing of such an idea though, if NATO spend some money there they wouldn't have to continue draw resources from other member states to perfom air patrol. p-)

[Fredrik]

C-130 AMP upgrade finished. Strategic airlift capability to be arranged.The report was a bit more precise on this matter as well.
Försvarsmakten föreslår att en ny operativ förmåga tillförs genom anskaffning av flygplan för strategiska transporter.And as the year specified is 07, really only the C-17 fits the bill.

[Luno]

Here is the news in english



Swedish Air Force could scrap 70 planes

Published: 26th April 2006 11:14 CET
Up to 70 JAS fighter planes could be scrapped if they are not able to be sold, according to a proposal submitted to the Swedish Ministry of Defence by the leader of the Swedish armed forces.

The proposal, from Supreme Commander Håkan Syrén, is attached to the 2007 military budget. He suggests that there should be around 100 operation JAS (Jakt/Attack/Spaning - Fighter/Attack/Reconnaissance) fighter planes in the Swedish Air Force.

This leaves 65-70 planes too many. If these planes, which have cost taxpayers around 20 billion kronor, cannot be sold, the proposal suggests they should be discarded.

But according to General Lieutenant Mats Nilsson, a slimming of the fleet is necessary, despite the cost.

"We need to have a proper number to be able to operate the system in the long-term from the type of organization which parliament and the government have determined," Nilsson said.

The entire JAS fighter plane program has cost Swedish taxpayers around 100 billion kronor.

A total of 204 JAS series fighter planes have been produced, both for Swedish military use and for export.

Of these, only 28 planes have been exported so far. 14 have been sold to Hungary and 14 to the Czech Republic.

[anv2]

Nice idea but practically expensive. Modification to NATO standard and building a non existing airforce capability including training and command & control with all the personell that has to come with it.


True, but NATO members have already hinted that they won't guard the Baltic air space forever. This means that the Baltic states should start looking for their own fighter aircraft some time in the future, likely with extensive help from NATO.

Second hand Gripen wouldn't be a bad choice, provided that it's reasonably priced. The high price tag of JAS-39 has been a problem in the past. With all the second hand F-16s coming into the market in the near future, Sweden can't expect to get much money out of any fighter deal.

[Thor]

The high price tag of JAS-39 has been a problem in the past. With all the second hand F-16s coming into the market in the near future, Sweden can't expect to get much money out of any fighter deal.
You couldn't be more wrong on this one. Gripen is the least costly 4th generation fighter and more importantly it's operational costs is much lower than than that of old planes like F-16, F-18 etc. That has been a huge selling point.

[anv2]

You couldn't be more wrong on this one. Gripen is the least costly 4th generation fighter and more importantly it's operational costs is much lower than than that of old planes like F-16, F-18 etc. That has been a huge selling point.

For a state-of-the-art aircraft it's probably cheap. However, compared to F-16 it's not. Generally speaking, F-16 is a better choice for countries with limited budget, while those countries with plenty of money prefer a more capable (larger) platform. F-16 has still plenty of life left in it, thanks to the support of the USA - something Sweden can never match.

Modern planes in general have lower operational costs than their predecessors. However, I don't know where you get the information that Gripen's operational costs are much lower than that of F-16 or F-18. In Finland's case (early 90's), F-18 was found to have the second lowest total cost when compared to F-16, JAS39, Mirage 2000-5 and MiG-29. It was generally believed that F-16 was the cheapest. While JAS-39's operational costs may have been the lowest of the bunch, they certainly weren't low enough to offset its initial price.

As for the Baltics, Sweden will not be able to sell JAS-39 without serious discount (or some major service deal). Otherwise, the amount of second hand F-16s available around the world in the future, combined with the American military support structure and political power is simply too much for Sweden and SAAB to handle.

[signatory]

As for the Baltics, Sweden will not be able to sell JAS-39 without serious discount (or some major service deal). Otherwise, the amount of second hand F-16s available around the world in the future, combined with the American military support structure and political power is simply too much for Sweden and SAAB to handle.

That must be why F-16 and F-18 lost out to Gripen in the Czech Republic (twice), Hungary and South Africa.

Right.

I don't think anyone can even imagine the F-16 to be of lower maintenance and operating cost than even the old Gripen jets. They are built with cost effectiveness in mind. The C/D 's 8000 hour airframe of the Gripen is also part of the calculations. (F-16 with 4000 hour and Typhoon with 6000.)

[signatory]

Here is the news in english

Published: 26th April 2006 11:14 CET
Up to 70 JAS fighter planes could be scrapped if they are not able to be sold, according to a proposal submitted to the Swedish Ministry of Defence by the leader of the Swedish armed forces.

[/FONT]


Not a single report in big media mention the fact that 31 jets will be upgraded to C/D standard...

Wtf would we do with 120 old non-NATO compatible A/B jets in the new defense organisation. Again, rather than 56 jets we will have 100 jets that we can actually use for something.

[signatory]

As expected the Military published a clarification basically repeating what they already said. Sorry only in Swedish but it has all been said in this thread:


Gripen moderniseras för framtiden

Publicerad: 26 april 2006 kl 15:15

I det budgetunderlag som Försvarsmakten överlämnade till regeringen den 25 april, föreslås att framtidens Gripen-flotta ska ha ett enhetligt utförande i versionerna JAS 39C/D. Dessa är anpassade för att kunna användas såväl nationellt som internationellt, vilket överensstämmer med inriktningen på Försvarsmaktens nya verksamhet.

Målet är att Försvarsmakten i framtiden ska ha 100 Gripen. Moderniseringen ska ske genom att 31 flygplan av den första generationens Gripen-flygplan (JAS 39A/B) byggs om.

- Vi får en större operativ effekt med JAS 39C/D och vi minskar kostnaderna ur ett livscykel-perspektiv. Att driva två system är betydligt dyrare än att driva ett, säger generallöjtnant Mats Nilsson vid Högkvarteret i Stockholm.

Även om det totala antalet flygplan minskar, är bedömningen att en enhetlig flygplanpark gör Gripen-systemet mera användbart i operativt hänseende. Samtidigt ska minskade kostnader för drift, vidmakthållande och utveckling möjliggöra att systemet kan vara operativt fram till cirka år 2040.

Räcker 100 flygplan för Försvarsmaktens behov?
- Ja, det är vår bedömning. Till fyra insatsdivisioner och en utbildningsorganisation, har vi kommit fram till att 100 är ett relevant antal, säger Mats Nilsson.

Avsikten är också att inleda ett så kallat demonstratorprogram, med inriktning på Gripen-systemets utvecklingsmöjligheter. Det kommer att ligga till grund för framtida beslut om systemets utveckling utifrån Försvarsmaktens framtida behov.

De flygplan som blir över i samband med moderniseringsprogrammet kan bjudas ut till försäljning. Leveranserna av JAS 39A inleddes 1993.

[anv2]

That must be why F-16 and F-18 lost out to Gripen in the Czech Republic (twice), Hungary and South Africa.


But lost in many other countries before that. Besides, the argument was mainly about second hand market. F-16 dominates that by sheer volume. Don't get me wrong, I like Gripen very much. I just think that its potential customer base is rather limited.



I don't think anyone can even imagine the F-16 to be of lower maintenance and operating cost than even the old Gripen jets. They are built with cost effectiveness in mind. The C/D 's 8000 hour airframe of the Gripen is also part of the calculations. (F-16 with 4000 hour and Typhoon with 6000.)

I don't argue that F-16 surpasses Gripen in operating costs. (Many military sources mention F-16 having much more airframe hours than 4000, though.) The point was that JAS-39's low operating costs are not necessarily enough to lower the total package cost to an acceptable level. While taking operating costs into account is very important, buying the aircraft with low nominal price tag can still be tempting to countries with very limited budget.

Btw, does anyone have an opinion on Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia having a common air force? Is it politically even plausible?

[signatory]

I don't argue that F-16 surpasses Gripen in operating costs. (Many military sources mention F-16 having much more airframe hours than 4000, though.) The point was that JAS-39's low operating costs are not necessarily enough to lower the total package cost to an acceptable level. While taking operating costs into account is very important, buying the aircraft with low nominal price tag can still be tempting to countries with very limited budget.

Sure, and I kind of touched on that with my comment earlier in this thread:


Nice idea but practically expensive. Modification to NATO standard and building a non existing airforce capability including training and command & control with all the personell that has to come with it.

I'm not against it, I have suggested in the past that the Baltic countries (and other Nordic countries) could utilize the flight school in Sweden as Czech, South African and Hungarian pilots do and use Gotland as a side-base. But it's a much larger project than one might think. Jets are the easy part. I wouldn't mind a joint Baltic-NATO-Swedish financing of such an idea though, if NATO spend some money there they wouldn't have to continue draw resources from other member states to perfom air patrol.

(That's talking about the 2:nd hand Gripen jets)

First of all I'd rather see them have western jets and what brand is not that important to me. The 2nd point is to make sure they have a stockpile of missiles. The 2nd point is more easily supplied by the US @ low or no cost because even if Sweden donated jets we can't donate amraams even if we had (which we don't) a surplus.

But wth... we'll see.


Btw, does anyone have an opinion on Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia having a common air force? Is it politically even plausible?

Since they already now accept foreign nations to do their patrolling under NATO framework I don't think that would be such a huge jump, politically. But that's only my outside view...

[lightfire]

Quote:
Btw, does anyone have an opinion on Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia having a common air force? Is it politically even plausible?


Since they already now accept foreign nations to do their patrolling under NATO framework I don't think that would be such a huge jump, politically. But that's only my outside view...
well,as far as I can tell a "common air force" looks less real that common european attitude to some outside conflict,e.a. Iraq:backhand:
Having in mind differences between baltic countries and a fact that they have their own small air force (each country) puts a huge stop to the idea of "common air force". NATO "air police" based in Zokniai,Lithuania rotates every 4 months,but indeed that's not foreva (plans are until late 2007). Estonia was thinking about Javelin jet, Latvia is not willing to cooperate in 100%,since it's building it's own AF capabilities(radar control center,airfield reconstruction etc.). maybe that's because of ambitions or will to have smth own. Another problem is of cource,the price. Whole Defence Budgets of Baltic countries all toogether consits of aprx 1bil USD and there's no reason to believe any significant changes in the close future.So those own fighters would create many finansial,logistical and in some ways-political problems.(e.a. all Baltic countries buy sqdrn or two of JAS 39s,but there are only few places to station them)
But that's only todays' attitude.
As someone trully mentioned,NATO's hinting,that this air police mission will not last forever,and some steps are being made. To my knowledge There's some lithuanian-czech AF cooperation,since Lithuania has L39s and L410(now it's being modernised in Czech Rep.). Plans for the closer future consist not only of czech pilots air policeing Baltic air space,but also station there for some longer time,e.a. make some permament training base. Lithuanian pilots do dot whish to loose their skils and qualification,so the deal consists of czech L159 to be stationed in Lithuania for rent to Lithuanian AF. I believe,that L159 will not be the end of story and eventually the question of JAS39 will arise. And here's the idea of common flight school,infrastructure,aircraft rent/deployment could evolutionate. We might have some weired situation,when the airspace of baltic countries,NATO members,would be patrooled by a dozzen or few dozzens of non-NATO country fighters. Rented ones,with Baltic pilots.Eventually rent could be changed into selling some of this unique "Baltic Skies Security Force under NATO command" fighters. i am sure Sweeden could be interested in such a project,since it supports strongly baltic countries fom their regain of independance in 1990-1991. Sweedish milltr support serves for their interests as well.

[baboon6]

How many NH90s and a109s are being acquired?

[jerka71_1]

How many NH90s and a109s are being acquired?

Sweden is buying 18 NH 90s (+ option for another 7) and 20 A109s!

[Resurrection]

well,as far as I can tell a "common air force" looks less real that common european attitude to some outside conflict,e.a. Iraq:backhand:
Having in mind differences between baltic countries and a fact that they have their own small air force (each country) puts a huge stop to the idea of "common air force". NATO "air police" based in Zokniai,Lithuania rotates every 4 months,but indeed that's not foreva (plans are until late 2007). Estonia was thinking about Javelin jet, Latvia is not willing to cooperate in 100%,since it's building it's own AF capabilities(radar control center,airfield reconstruction etc.). maybe that's because of ambitions or will to have smth own. Another problem is of cource,the price. Whole Defence Budgets of Baltic countries all toogether consits of aprx 1bil USD and there's no reason to believe any significant changes in the close future.So those own fighters would create many finansial,logistical and in some ways-political problems.(e.a. all Baltic countries buy sqdrn or two of JAS 39s,but there are only few places to station them)
But that's only todays' attitude.
As someone trully mentioned,NATO's hinting,that this air police mission will not last forever,and some steps are being made. To my knowledge There's some lithuanian-czech AF cooperation,since Lithuania has L39s and L410(now it's being modernised in Czech Rep.). Plans for the closer future consist not only of czech pilots air policeing Baltic air space,but also station there for some longer time,e.a. make some permament training base. Lithuanian pilots do dot whish to loose their skils and qualification,so the deal consists of czech L159 to be stationed in Lithuania for rent to Lithuanian AF. I believe,that L159 will not be the end of story and eventually the question of JAS39 will arise. And here's the idea of common flight school,infrastructure,aircraft rent/deployment could evolutionate. We might have some weired situation,when the airspace of baltic countries,NATO members,would be patrooled by a dozzen or few dozzens of non-NATO country fighters. Rented ones,with Baltic pilots.Eventually rent could be changed into selling some of this unique "Baltic Skies Security Force under NATO command" fighters. i am sure Sweeden could be interested in such a project,since it supports strongly baltic countries fom their regain of independance in 1990-1991. Sweedish milltr support serves for their interests as well.

Interesting, thanks for the info. So even though the Baltic countries' economies are doing great (I think...), there's no reason to believe in an increased military budget any time soon?

[lightfire]

Increase would be stable. The required 2% of GDP will be/is achieved,however,even despite booming ecconomies,the total expences of money is still not great and it will take time(maybe a dozzen years) to reach a level of at least Denmark. Until then,I wouldn't dream of much bigger funding. As I've said,1bill. USD in total,hopefully could reach 1bill euros in 2008-2010. And that's still not enough to purchase fighters,essp,when there are other priorities.

[tommy00]

Whole Defence Budgets of Baltic countries all toogether consits of aprx 1bil USD and there's no reason to believe any significant changes in the close .

Is it really 1bil. USD.I know that Estonian defense budget in 2006 is ca 250mlnUSD.(Estonia beeing twice less then Latvia and 3 times as Lithuania)