Russia has reiterated a firm stance against any transfer or sale of Argentine Mi-171E helicopters to Kyiv, tying the position to Argentina’s historical use of the aircraft in Antarctic support programs and to the constraints imposed by end-user certification. A senior Russian diplomatic official in Buenos Aires emphasized Moscow’s commitment to responsible arms export practices and explained that channeling such equipment to conflict zones, including Ukraine, would breach those commitments. Beyond policy considerations, the official noted practical hurdles, including the helicopters being inoperable and the extensive repairs they would require before any potential deployment. He also stressed that exporting them would run counter to Argentina’s obligations under end-user controls and international agreements, and would challenge the credibility of Argentina in honoring the terms of such arrangements. In explaining the reasoning, the diplomat highlighted that the Antarctic missions historically tied to the aircraft underscore a specific sphere of use that does not align with direct military transfers to zones of active armed conflict. The discussion reflects a broader international framework in which arms transfers are assessed not only on geopolitical factors but also on technical readiness and compliance with multi-lateral commitments. Officials in Moscow pointed to Argentina’s broader export controls framework, which is designed to prevent diversion and misuse of sensitive defense equipment. The conversation also touched on the long-standing practice of ensuring that end-user certifications are respected, thereby reducing the risk of arms ending up in unintended hands. Observers note that such positions often serve as signals to other states about the careful balance countries strike between their own historical defense roles, regional security responsibilities, and international obligations. The emphasis on end-user verification, the operational status of the equipment, and the associated repair implications all contribute to a cautious approach to any hypothetical transfer. Overall, the stance reinforces the message that responsible arms trading requires clear assurances, documented end-use commitments, and a recognition of the practical realities surrounding the readiness of equipment, especially when it has historical ties to specialized missions like Antarctic support programs. This careful articulation of policy suggests that a sale or transfer would not only contravene stated commitments but could also undermine broader norms governing arms exports in situations characterized by regional instability and fluctuating security dynamics. Attribution: TASS
