It is easy to understand why Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has said he is considering ending Russia's arms production cooperation with the former Soviet republic of Ukraine.

Ukraine's uncertain policy, its possible membership in the U.S.-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization and its anti-Russian rhetoric force Russian leadership to seek other options.

But does Russia need to hurry? The companies fulfilling Russian orders are located in eastern Ukraine, a territory whose population is set firmly against NATO membership. Without backing from this industrialized region, Ukraine is unlikely to join NATO any time in the near future.

Self-reliance on armaments is a good thing, but partnership is necessary, too. Should the Russian government sever industrial cooperation on cruise missiles, we might lose contracts for the production of components for RS-20 -- NATO designation SS-18 Satan -- strategic intercontinental ballistic missiles as well. For the RS-20 ICBMs are the linchpin of Russia's nuclear deterrence. Russian-Ukrainian Sea Launch space cooperation and much else could suffer.

Forget for a moment that the Russian government needs to produce a full range of weapons in specific quantities and of specific quality. Is Russia's defense industry ready to take such a step?

In June, Mikhail Babich, deputy chairman of the defense committee of the State Duma, the lower and main chamber of the Russian Parliament, said: "One-third of our defense plants are in the red or are about to go bankrupt. Another third are barely making ends meet. And only one third are doing moderately well."

Speaking of lead times, Babich said frankly that "production of modern fourth and fifth generation weapons and military equipment sometimes takes several years, and unless we solve these problems, any business planning, investment, or retooling is out of the question."

Indeed, it may be said that Babich was optimistic when he mentioned "several years." Pantsyr-S1 and S-400 surface-to-air missile systems designed to repel space attacks show that at least 10 years might be needed.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov made a similar remark about the Pantsyr's lead time. Speaking at the end of March in Tula, he said the developer, Tula's Instrument-Making Design Bureau, had repeatedly pushed back its deadlines. The reason, he said, was its failure "to establish sound relations with its suppliers and co-producers."

Maybe Russia should not hasten to sever relations with its Ukrainian manufacturers, especially since international experience shows us the advantages of multinational cooperation in weapons production.

(Andrei Kislyakov is a political commentator for RIA Novosti. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)