The election of Su-30MK2 base model (and I would call it like that) was due to time constraints in the delivery times. Our political administration that mostly ran the selection program just want them to came "fast and now".
You have to understand that our air force being pretty western (US) oriented, didn't really like the russian option. Inside the fighter community there was a lot of desires not to go for the russian option (being MiG-29M2 or Flanker) and this is explained in two points:
a) Mainly due to typical russophobia and ignorance. Most of our pilots are US-indoctrinated and as such mantains the "only western approach". Plain and simple, it's just a bias.
b) Russian logistical style on MTBO and general manteinance philosophy is pretty alien to us.
This have started to change anyway when current russian equipment is being used. Army Aviation per example fell in love with the russian kit (Mi-17v5 and Mi-35M) in short time, even if they also came from similar background of education, Venezuelan Air Force is without a doubt the most elitist of our armed services. After December 10 demostration anyway, nearly everybody here fall in love with the Flanker (everybody except the old F-16 pilots of the Fighter Aviation Group 16 that now are on second order being always the real pride of our national defense assets ...
You can see it as pure emotional and subjective motives and they're indeed. We would have a long and tough process of asimilation of such advanced and different technology like Su-30MK2.
Talking about that Su-30MK2 is just the start of the program because the true interest for the future is the Su-35 (this have even said by the current President) and since the begining the interest was for both of them. There was never any much noise here about IAIA advanced customised products like Su-30MKI series.
In a sidenote I'm happy anyway with the introduction of Su-30MK2 technology, maybe isn't the most advanced from Russia, but we have to learn a damn long road, and some of our national services are having terrible problems with their most advanced hardware due to a real planification of the procurement at the perspective of long time in the capabilities of our local services to mantain them. This is not in the technical sense (our technicians on manteinance units are good and Fighter Aviation Group 16 experience with the F-16A is a true example of that) but from the engineering and support perspective. The navy is suffering a lot of this with the advanced radars supplied by Israel for our Frigate Upgrade programs (Elta EL/M 2238 Star-3D) and Air Force is not in shape for this anyway.
So what we really need is not just buying advanced russian equipment but along such line research in a defense industry even at second and first level manteinance (Airbase and Depot Manteinance of Engines, Avionics and Airframe) that could allow us some self-suficency in the future. This along national own training programs based on simulations technologies is a must if our Flanker program should suceed in the forewards.
Army Aviation with the Russian Helicopter program have made a sound (in paper we have to see it in practice) approach. We have bought the most advanced Simulation System for our Mi-17v5/35M/26T in the whole world to be set up in the following 3 years, a whole simulation center being made with 5 simulation systems of last technology and made up to request by RAT. Kronshdadt (St Petesburg) including 2 advanced 6 axis free movement systems. This simulation center will not only serve to our armed forces but will also be available for other regional users. We have also get tech-transfer agreements in Local Manteinance Center for Depot level works for the three systems that would if well done, allow us some level of local manteinance issues to be done.
In my humble opinion, the Air Force having chose a much more advanced equipment (and again IMHO the correct one for their own lackings and needs for know-how) should follow a similar approach. I'm not in position to said if such decision have been made.
