Tag: S400

The Empire hits back: ISIS, Turkey, Israel and the West attack Syria, key Iranian and Russian ally

November 18, Israel’s Shin Bet Chief met with Turkey’s intelligence agency
November 25, NATO Chief met with Erdogan
November 26, Al Qaeda and ISIS launched an attack against the Syrian state

Terrorist Offensive in Aleppo Reeks of US and Israeli Involvement – Expert

Nov. 29, 2024

The sudden escalation in Syria where anti-government groups launched a sudden offensive towards Aleppo betrays the involvement of several foreign powers, including Israel and the United States, says Seyed Mohammad Marandi, political analyst and professor at Tehran University.

“We see thousands of foreign fighters affiliated to al-Qaeda* from across Central Asia,” Marandi tells Sputnik. “They’ve been mobilized and well trained to carry out this assault.”

The offensive, he points out, takes place “literally a day after Netanyahu said he needs the ceasefire in order to deal with the so-called Iranian threat,” and it appears that the goal of this offensive is “to cut off Syria from the Axis of Resistance in order to isolate Lebanon.”

“Obviously, this is being done in coordination with the United States. The whole dirty war in Syria since 2011 was led by the United States,” Marandi adds. “We know that Jake Sullivan back then, who is now the national security adviser of Biden, said in an email to Hillary Clinton on February 12th, 2012, that in Syria, al Qaeda is on our side.”

Continue reading at sputnikglobe.com

Turkish intelligence directing extremist offensive in northwest Syria: Report

Nov. 30, 2024

Militants from the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) currently invading Aleppo, Syria’s second-largest city, are taking orders from Turkish intelligence, French news agency AFP reported on 30 November.

HTS, formerly known as the Nusra Front, launched a lightning offensive from the group’s stronghold in Idlib Governorate on Wednesday. Its fighters took over numerous villages in the Aleppo countryside before taking control of large parts of Aleppo City on Saturday, including the ancient citadel.

AFP writes that “Opposition sources in touch with Turkish intelligence said Turkey had given a green light to the offensive.”

An AFP correspondent in HTS-held Idlib further reported that “The jihadists and their Turkey-backed allies took orders from a joint operations command.”

Continue reading at thecradle.co

Syria could be the next target of Israel aggression after Lebanon truce

Nov 30, 2024

Syria could be the next target of Israel’s regional military offensive after a ceasefire for Lebanon was agreed this week, with the war against Hezbollah likely to be expanded beyond the Lebanese borders as Bashar Al-Assad rapidly loses support from his neutered patrons.

Syrians have already felt the pain of the Lebanon war with at least 111 refugees killed, including 39 children, during the most intense stage of the Israeli assault between 23 September to 28 November, forcing thousands of families to reluctantly flee to Syria where there is already a strong Hezbollah contingent supporting the Assad regime.

This week’s Lebanon ceasefire was reportedly agreed with a separate secret US-Israeli addendum which gives Israel the green light to strike Hezbollah targets inside Syria, including suspected supply chains, something it has already done hundreds of times over the past 10 years (although it rarely admits to the strikes) but monitors have noted a sharp increase in recent months.

Continue reading at www.newarab.com

Ukrainian Trained, Turkish Sponsored Syrian Rebels Lead Assault on Aleppo

Dec 1, 2024

The offensive thrust into Syria’s Aleppo governate that began on Nov. 27, is being carried out by a coalition of Islamist militant groups led by the Turkish backed former Al Qaeda affiliated group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.

According to reports on some Islamist social media sites, the rebel groups based in the Idlib region – which is said to include members of the Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP) – had received operational training from special forces troops from the Khimik group of Ukraine’s Main Intelligence Directorate (HUR). The training team focused on tactics developed during the war in Ukraine, including on the use of drones.

HUR’s Khimik group was credited with the attack on a Russian military base on the southeastern outskirts of Aleppo on Sept. 15, in which Russian attack drones and “camouflaged improvised explosive devices,” were destroyed according to a Kyiv Post military intelligence source.

Continue reading at www.kyivpost.com

Syria at the center of Israel’s strategy to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its arsenal

Nov 30, 2024

During the two months of the war in Lebanon, Syria became an extension of the front opened by Israel against Hezbollah. The Israeli army intensified its strikes against Hezbollah’s leaders, ammunition warehouses and smuggling routes, in order to prevent it from sending weapons and reinforcements to Lebanon. Syria continues to play a pivotal role in the ceasefire agreement signed between Israel and Lebanon on Wednesday, November 27.

While the Israeli army estimates that it has destroyed around three-quarters of Hezbollah’s stockpile of medium and short-range rockets, as well as a significant proportion of its missiles, the challenge now is to prevent the Shiite group from rebuilding its arsenal, with the help of Iran. Under the terms of the agreement, Lebanon has undertaken to tighten border controls to prevent the entry of illegal weapons. In the event of the Lebanese army failing to meet its obligations, Israel has obtained the right to act from the United States, in a letter of guarantees signed on the sidelines of the agreement.

Continue reading at www.lemonde.fr

Islamic nations must not let US, Israel exploit Syrian crisis

Dec 1, 2024

Masoud Pezeshkian made the remarks in an address at a plenary session of Iran’s Parliament on Sunday as he pointed to the latest developments in Syria and the ongoing clashes between the country’s military forces and foreign-backed Takfiri terrorists in and around the northwestern provinces of Aleppo and Idlib.

“We hope that Muslim countries intervene and will not allow America and Israel to exploit this domestic conflict within this Islamic country,” the Iranian president said.

Stressing that the aggression by Takfiri terrorists on Syrian soil is supported by the United States and European countries, Pezeshkian said, “These actions are being carried out with American and European weapons.”

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and its allied terrorist factions have since Wednesday advanced into sections of Aleppo and seized some areas following heavy clashes with Syria’s government and popular forces.

Continue reading at en.mehrnews.com

Turkey won’t support peace plan with territorial concessions, Ukrainian lawmaker says

Nov 29, 2024

Turkey won’t support a peace plan that involves freezing the war in Ukraine and Kyiv making territorial concessions to Moscow, Ukrinform reported on Nov. 29, citing Ukrainian lawmaker Ahtem Chiygoz.

Chiygoz earlier took part in a meeting of the friendship groups of the parliaments of Ukraine and Turkey in Ankara. During the event, Turkish officials expressed support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, including the Russian-occupied Crimean peninsula, Chiygoz said.

“There are constant accusations, especially from the Russian side, that Turkey is committed to a peace formula that involves freezing the conflict and concessions in territorial integrity,” he added.

Continue reading at kyivindependent.com

US no longer objects to use of S-400 air defense systems by Turkey, Defense Minister says

ANKARA, November 26. /TASS/. The United States no longer have any objections regarding the use of S-400 missile air defense systems purchased from Russia, Turkish Defense Minister Yasar Guler said.

“During our recent meetings [with the Americans] we rejected what they wanted from us in the context of the S-400. Now, the Americans have no objections in this regard. An order is the only thing that is necessary to send these systems to [their designated] regions. It would take about 12 hours to deploy the system to a condition when we are able to use it,” the minister said, according to T24.

Turkey was excluded from the F-35 development program after it bought an S-400 regiment kit from Russia in 2019. According to the Pentagon, these missile air defense systems could help revealing certain specifications of jet fighters and thus negatively affect their combat capabilities.

Continue reading at tass.com/

We remind our readers that publication of articles on our site does not mean that we agree with what is written. Our policy is to publish anything which we consider of interest, so as to assist our readers  in forming their opinions. Sometimes we even publish articles with which we totally disagree, since we believe it is important for our readers to be informed on as wide a spectrum of views as possible.

U.S. lawmakers reject F-16 sale to Turkey

Nov 02 2021

Forty-one members of the U.S. Congress sent a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Monday, opposing possible plans by the Biden administration to sell F-16 fighter jets to Turkey.

Lawmakers led by Chris Pappas, alongside Hellenic Caucus Co-Chairs Gus Bilirakis and Carolyn Maloney, requested more information from Blinken, asking about recent reports that Turkey requested to purchase 40 Lockheed Martin-made F-16 fighter jets, along with modernisation kits for its existing warplanes.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan renewed Turkey’s request to buy the fighter jets, which would replace part of its aging air force fleet, during a meeting with the U.S. President Joe Biden on the margins of G-20 summit in Rome on Sunday. After the meeting, Erdoğan said Biden had responded positively to his request for new jets.

Turkey’s purchase of a first batch of Russian S-400 missiles in 2019 prompted the Pentagon to suspend it from a programme to develop and purchase F-35 stealth fighter jets. The expulsion was finalised on Sept. 23. A week later, the Turkish government sent a request to Washington for the purchase of the F-16s.

Maintaining the Russian defence missiles are incompatible with NATO systems and pose a security risk to its F-35 fighter jets, the United States imposed sanctions on Turkey’s defence procurement agency in December under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).

Turkey said it has no hesitation about buying more S-400s and is holding talks on the possible procurement, the country’s top defence procurement official said in September. Washington has called on Ankara to drop any plans to purchase more of the missiles or risk further punitive measures.

U.S. lawmakers cited four reasons for their opposition to the Turkish attempt to purchase F16s.

Since the CAATSA sanctions, “the Erdoğan government has made it clear that it has no intention of coming into compliance with U.S. law or dealing with the underlying conditions that led to Turkey’s ejection from the F-35 program and Congressional holds on purchases of American weapons,” the lawmakers said in their letter to Blinken.

The Block 70 modernisation kits also pose similar collocation risks if Ankara continues to possess Russian S-400s, according to the lawmakers.

The lawmakers also stated that while they would like to see Turkey anchored in the West, this goal will not be achieved “if the Erdoğan government escapes accountability for violating U.S. law and the standards of the NATO alliance”.

Last week, half a dozen advocacy groups from various ethnic and national backgrounds, including the Hellenic American Leadership Council, the Armenian National Committee of America, the American Friends of Kurdistan, the Hindu American Foundation, the Middle East Forum, the American Jewish Committee, PSEKA, the American Hellenic Institute, the Coordinated Effort of Hellenes, and the Armenian Council of America sent a joint letter to Congress asking lawmakers to stop the sale of the American jets to Turkey.

Published at ahvalnews.com

We remind our readers that publication of articles on our site does not mean that we agree with what is written. Our policy is to publish anything which we consider of interest, so as to assist our readers  in forming their opinions. Sometimes we even publish articles with which we totally disagree, since we believe it is important for our readers to be informed on as wide a spectrum of views as possible.

 

NATO appoints Turkey to lead drive into the Middle East and Asia

By Rick Rozoff
April 1, 2021

On the first of the year the North Atlantic Treaty Organization transferred command of the NATO Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) to Turkey.

On March 30 NATO turned over its current mission in Afghanistan to Turkish Brigadier General Selçuk Yurtsizoğlu.

In a phone conversation on April 1 U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar discussed Turkey’s role in leading the NATO Resolute Support mission in Afghanistan among other matters.

Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Mevlut Cavusoglu met with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken while both were attending the NATO meeting of foreign ministers and secretaries on March 23-24. (Blinken on the occasion: “Turkey is a long-standing and valued ally.”)

Speaking at an event in the U.S. on March 9 NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said: “I think that we need to understand that Turkey is an important ally. Because you can just look at the map and then you see that Turkey is extremely important.” [That final sentence is key and will be addressed later.]

A few days earlier Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan wrote on Twitter, “We would like to thank the NATO Secretary General for his objective evaluations on Euro-Atlantic security and defence matters.”

This is notwithstanding Turkey having supported and supervised if not directed last year’s 45-day war by Azerbaijan – the countries identify themselves (or itself) as “one nation, two states” – against minuscule Nagorno-Karabakh, its invasion of Northern Iraq thirteen years ago, its ongoing proxy war in Libya, its both direct and proxy war in Syria, its regular buzzing of fellow NATO member Greece’s aircraft in the Aegean Sea and its – now at 43 years – longest counterinsurgency war in the world against ethnic Kurds in its own country (which has spilled over into Iraq and Syria.) None of that in any manner disturbs NATO, the self-styled alliance of democracies.

What does distress the 30-member military bloc is that Turkey has purchased Russian-made S-400 anti-aircraft weapons. In doing so it has violated a cardinal tenet of NATO: one must only purchase NATO-interoperable weapons from fellow member states or partners like Sweden and Israel. Turkey’s unwillingness to cancel the purchase of the S-400s led to the U.S. suspending Turkey’s participation in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program (which the Biden administration has extended). When Greece expressed interest in purchasing the F-35s intended for Turkey, a Turkish official quipped that Ankara could use its S-400s to shoot down Greek F-35s.

The Western news media make much of the minor division over the S-400s but neglect to disclose the substantial and expanding role Turkey is playing in NATO’s plans for the Middle East and Asia, both areas strongly stressed as targets of growing involvement by Stoltenberg at the recent NATO foreign ministerial.

The above-quoted comment by NATO chief Stoltenberg about a look at the map establishing Turkey’s geostrategic importance to NATO is the simple truth. One impossible to miss. It is NATO’s only member in two continents, and its only member in Asia. It is the only member bordering the Middle East – Iran, Iran and Syria – and the Caucasus – Armenia and Georgia. It controls access from the Mediterranean Sea to the Sea of Marmara and from the Sea of Marmara to the Black Sea, which in turn gives exclusive access to the Sea of Azov.

Because of its location, in addition to U.S. air force and other military personnel stationed at the Incirlik Air Base and other locations in the nation, NATO has a presence at the Incirlik Air Base and at the Diyarbakir Air Base. (The second has been used for NATO operations starting in Bosnia in the 1990s and against Kurdish rebels in Turkey’s southeast.) In 2012, as NATO was intensifying its “drive to the south and east” (a State Department term), it transferred its Allied Land Command from Germany and Spain to Turkey. In the same year the alliance installed a Forward-Based X-Band Transportable anti-missile radar facility, with a range of 2,900 miles, in the country.

The U.S. maintains B61 nuclear bombs in Turkey under a NATO nuclear sharing/burden sharing arrangement which mandates that the host country provide aircraft to deliver the bombs.

Ahead of the U.S. and British attack on Iraq in 2003 NATO placed Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) missile batteries in Turkey. In 2013 NATO agreed to place six PAC-3 batteries near the Turkish-Syrian border to “protect against ballistic missiles.” Two years later Turkey called a NATO Article 4 consultation to request the alliance’s support for its role in Syria – in both the above cases as though it were the victim and not the aggressor.

Turkey is the second-most populous nation in NATO, and the most populous in Europe and Eurasia. It is also second only to the U.S. in the number of troops it has under arms: 437,000. It contributes over $100 million a year to NATO common funds.

Exploiting a seemingly incongruous but to date highly effective strategy of combining neo-Ottoman pan-Turkism, Sunni pan-Islamism and the role of NATO’s eastern and southern vanguard, Ankara has now positioned itself as a major player in North Africa, the Middle East, the Balkans, the Caucasus and increasingly in Central Asia, which is to say in the last two examples former parts of the Soviet Union and historical Russia.

Regarding last year’s war against Nagorno-Karabakh and the fact that Turkey’s role had not only not drawn even mild censure from NATO – far from it, NATO’s Stoltenberg visited the Turkish capital only a few days after the war was launched – Lebanese scholar Yeghia Tashjian recently described it succinctly but comprehensively:

“Less than half a year has passed since the insolent aggression of Azerbaijan and Turkey against Artsakh [Nagorno-Karabakh] and Armenia. A NATO member country, using NATO weapons, committed a brazen act of aggression. Meanwhile, Turkey openly used terrorists from the Middle East….Disregarding numerous facts about the direct involvement of militants of terrorist groups by Turkey, the NATO Secretary-General [last week praised] the role of Turkey in the fight against terrorism.”

Shortly after the “one nation, two states” (with a combined population of 95,000,000) fought a 45-day one-sided war against Nagorno-Karabakh (with a population of 145,000), Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was the guest of honor at the postwar victory [if that is the word] parade in the capital of Azerbaijan on December 10, where among other matters he praised Enver Pasha, one of the key architects of the Armenian genocide of the last century, and read a poem condemning the “division of Azerbaijani territory” between Iran and Russia in the 1800s. Iran has a sizable Azeri-Turkic minority that could be exploited by Azerbaijan and Turkey, with the U.S. and Israel behind them, to create a 1990s Yugoslavia scenario of attempting to splinter the nation with separatist movements. Estimates of the number of ethnic Azeris in Iran range as high as 19 million (about twice the population of Azerbaijan itself), and their percentage of the total population as high as 20 percent.

As a result of Erdoğan’s poetry reading in Baku, the Iranian Foreign Ministry summoned Turkey’s ambassador to Tehran. “The Turkish ambassador was informed that the era of territorial claims and expansionist empires is over,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry said on its website.

“Iran does not allow anyone to meddle in its territorial integrity.”

As the Turkish military plays a more prominent, indeed dominant, role in NATO’s mission in Afghanistan, where NATO troops now outnumber American ones, Ankara will expand its pan-Turkic influence in that country and throughout Central Asia. Abdul Rashid Dostum, Afghan vice-president from 2014-2020 and a Turkic-speaking ethnic Uzbek, lived in Turkey much of the first decade of the century and can safely be assumed to be a Turkish asset.

Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan have majority Turkic-speaking populations. Tajikistan (1.2 million) and Russia (13 million) have sizable Turkic-speaking minorities.

The Uyghurs in China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region are ethnic Turkic. Uyghur separatists refer to the region as East Turkestan. The East Turkestan Liberation Organization of the early 2000s was established in Turkey in the 1990s.

NATO and Turkey. Bridgehead and spearhead. Just look at the map.

Published at antibellum679354512.wordpress.com

US Worried About Allies Buying S-400s Because It Might Detect F-35 Stealth Jets, Media Claims

by Tim Korso
Mar 26, 2021
PHOTO: © Sputnik / Alexey Kudenko

The US has already slammed its NATO ally, Turkey, over its the latter’s decision to buy air defence missile systems from Russia, and now is pressing India to abandone alleged plans to buy the same weapons from Moscow.

The US fears that its stealth jets are visible to the S-400s, a suspicion that may be behind Washington’s efforts to dissuade allies and partners from buying the Russian missile systems, The National Interest, an online media outlet, alleged.

The National Interest indicated that the F-22 and the F-35 fighter jet, as well as the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, rely on speed and ability to rapidly enter and exit air defence radar zones. However, as the outlet points out, the S-400s have become increasingly advanced as they now communicate their radar data in real-time.

According to The National Interest online website, this feature might allow the S-400 to negate the US jets’ advantage to give the Russian weapon the ability to effectively track and shoot down American stealth fighters.

The online outlet posted a story suggesting that this feature of S-400, which Moscow has long advertised, might be behind the Pentagon’s recent efforts to convince India to abandon its reported plans to buy the Russian air defence missile system. It would also explain why Washington slapped sanctions against its NATO ally – Turkey – after the latter refused to ditch the S-400s it had bought.

How Washington Opposes World-Wide S-400 Sales

The US claimed at the time that the motive for sanctions and the freezing of F-35 sales to Ankara was the incompatibility of the Russian weapons to the NATO defence grid. Later, Washington alleged that Moscow can obtain critical information about F-35s via S-400s deployed in Turkey, but refused to work with Ankara to prevent the potential vulnerability. More recently, the White House has blamed Turkey for purportedly not acting as a “US ally” by making the sovereign decision to buy S-400s from Russia.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan dismissed White House criticism of his government’s deal with Moscow and repeatedly reminded Washington how Ankara unsuccessfully tried to procure Patriot missile systems from the US for years. He explained that Turkey had no other choice than to look elsewhere to boost its national security. He rejected all US attempts to meddle in the country’s sovereign affairs and suggested the creation of a working group to reach a compromise on the issue instead. The proposal, however, has been so far been ignored by the US.

Published at sputniknews.com

Ankara defies US sanctions, threatens reciprocal steps

Cavusoglu said Turkey’s response would be shaped by a review being carried out by the defence sector into the sanctions’ impact.

17/12/2020

Turkey will not reverse its purchase of Russian S-400 missile defence systems and will take reciprocal steps after evaluating US sanctions imposed over the acquisition, Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said on Thursday.

The United States on Monday imposed sanctions targeting fellow NATO member Turkey’s Defence Industry Directorate (SSB), its chief, Ismail Demir, and three other staff for buying the S-400s.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Wednesday the sanctions were a “hostile attack” against Turkey’s defence industry, and were bound to fail.

Cavusoglu said Turkey’s response would be shaped by a review being carried out by the defence sector, along with the foreign and justice ministries, into the impact of the sanctions.

“We will surely take our steps in line with these,” he told broadcaster Kanal 24. “It’s not important whether the sanctions are soft or harsh, sanctions in themselves are wrong,” he said.

“Looking at the content of the sanctions, these are not measures that will shake us to the core or impact us very much.”

Turkey says it bought the S-400s out of necessity as it was unable to get defence systems from a NATO ally on satisfactory terms. “If there was to be a step back, it would have happened by now,” Cavusoglu said.

The United States says the S-400s pose a threat to its F-35 fighter jets and to NATO’s broader defence systems. Turkey rejects this and says S-400s will not be integrated into NATO.

Speaking to the state-owned Anadolu news agency, Demir played down the impact of the measures, saying they did not affect existing contracts, and covered only a limited number of Turkish companies.

“For instance, a company where the SSB hold a majority stake may be impacted, but there are close to no such firms. There are no such firms on critical projects,” he said.

The sanctions come at a delicate moment in fraught relations between Ankara and Washington as Democratic President-elect Joe Biden gears up to take office on January 20, replacing Republican incumbent Donald Trump.

Asked whether ties could normalise under Biden, Cavusoglu said Washington must address Turkey’s opposition to US support for Syrian Kurdish fighters, and Ankara’s request to extradite a US-based cleric it accuses of organising a 2016 coup attempt.

“If the United States thinks strategically, they need Turkey very much. They say this, but they must do what is necessitated by this,” he said.

Published at https://thearabweekly.com/ankara-defies-us-sanctions-threatens-reciprocal-steps

Turkey Vows Response to US Sanctions Over Purchase of Russian Missile System

by Ilya Tsukanov
Dec. 14, 2020

Earlier Monday, the US Treasury introduced sanctions on four Turkish officials and the Presidency of Defence Industries, the Turkish government office responsible for strengthening national security and managing the supply of military technology, over Ankara’s purchase of Russia’s S-400 air defence system.

Turkey “condemns and rejects” Washington’s decision to slap sanctions on its defence officials and the Presidency of Defence Industries over Ankara’s purchase of a Russian-made air defence system, and reserves the right to respond, even this means worsened relations with Washington, the Turkish Foreign Ministry has announced.

Turkey, the ministry said, will “take the necessary steps gainst this decision, which will inevitably have a negative impact on our relations. Furthermore, Turkey will not refrain from taking measures it considers necessary to ensure its national security.”

The ministry did not specify what these measures may entail.

Ankara also rejected the US justification for the sanctions in relation to the threat supposedly posed to NATO by its S-400s, suggesting such claims have no basis in reality.

“Turkey had proposed the creation of a technical working group with NATO’s participation, and has repeatedly proposed resolving this issue on an objective and realistic basis, without political bias. We invite the United States to reconsider this unfair decision,” the ministry indicated.

US Slaps Sanctions on Turkey, Says It’s Still ‘A Valued Ally’

Earlier in the day, while announcing the Treasury’s new S-400-related sanctions on Ankara, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo assured Turkey that it remains an important ally to the US, and expressed hope that that the country would take steps to resolve the disagreement by getting rid of its S-400s.

“I also urge Turkey to resolve the S-400 problem immediately in coordination with the United States. Turkey is a valued Ally and an important regional security partner for the United States, and we seek to continue our decades-long history of productive defence-sector cooperation by removing the obstacle of Turkey’s S-400 possession as soon as possible,” Pompeo said in a statement.

Turkey, Pompeo added, had been warned repeatedly “at the highest levels” that “its purchase of the S-400 system would endanger the security of US military technology and personnel and provide substantial funds to Russia’s defence sector, as well as Russian access to the Turkish armed forces and defence industry.”

The secretary suggested that Turkey moved forward with purchasing and testing S-400s “despite the availability of alternative, NATO-interoperable systems to meet its defence requirements.” This decision, Pompeo recalled, earlier prompted the US to kick Turkey out of the F-35 programme.

Sanctions Illegitimate, Arbitrary, Russia Says

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov chimed in on the matter later Monday, saying Moscow did not find the sanctions surprising.

“This is, of course, another manifestation of an arrogant attitude towards international law, a manifestation of illegitimate, unilateral coercive measures that the United States has been using for many years, already decades, left and right,” Lavrov said, speaking to reporters during a visit to Bosnia.

Turkey’s  decision to purchase S-400 contributed to a sharp decline in Turkish-US relations, with the US booting Turkey out of the F-35 programme in mid-2019, and later warning that there would be “serious consequences” for the “security relationship” between Washington and Ankara if Turkey continued to proceed with its S-400 testing activities.

Russia and Turkey inked a $2.5 billion S-400 contract in late 2017, with Moscow offering Ankara a lucrative credit deal as Washington stalled on the sale of the latest generation of Patriot missile systems to its NATO ally.

US officials have generally refrained from specifying what it is about the S-400 that makes it a danger to NATO jets, including the new F-35, although observers have suggested that the spat may be connected to the S-400’s suspected ability to find out the $1.5 trillion jet’s potential design flaws.

Published at sputniknews.com

What America’s biggest-ever defence bill of $740bn means for Middle East

MEE looks at national defence bill and what it entails for US military’s approach to region

10 December 2020

Both the US House of Representatives and the Senate overwhelmingly passed a $740bn defence spending bill in a rebuke to President Donald Trump, setting the stage for a loyalty test among Republican lawmakers if the president issues an expected veto.

The National Defence Authorisation Act (NDAA) includes a provision that bars any troop reductions in Afghanistan, South Korea, and Germany without adequate justifications, and requires the president to issue sanctions against Turkey over its purchase of a Russian-made missile defence system.

Trump has said he wants to withdraw US forces from the three countries, and is also resisting sanctions against Turkey, among other contentious issues.

Trump has been vehemently opposed to the bill, which passed with a 335-78 vote in the House on Tuesday, and then passed in the Senate on Friday by an 84-13 vote.

The House may have enough votes to override a presidential veto.

Still, amid the political clash between Trump and legislators, it remains the largest defence budget in the history of the United States, topping last year’s by $2bn, and has been criticised for its funding of military operations overseas rather than using the money for domestic needs.

“It is unconscionable to pass a Pentagon budget that continues to fund unnecessary projects and endless wars during a time of widespread suffering across our country,” Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, who voted against the bill, said in a statement.

“We should be investing our resources here at home – not increasing our already exorbitant Pentagon budget.”

The bill contains many provisions that will have potential consequences for the Middle East, whether it is continuing to aid certain countries or mandating sanctions on others.

Middle East Eye takes a look at the NDAA and what it entails for the US military’s approach to the region.

More gifts to Israel

US assistance to Israel has been a staple of the government’s defence budget for decades, and this year’s bill continues the legacy.

The bill says the US will give Israel $3.3bn in foreign military aid in 2021, a number that has been annually maintained for the past 10 years.

This assistance would include $73m for the Iron Dome short-range anti-missile system, a US-Israel co-produced weapons programme. Another $77m will go towards the Arrow 3 Upper Tier Interceptor anti-ballistic missile system, and $50m will go towards the David Sling Weapons System.

The NDAA also includes a provision that would transfer precision-guided munitions to Israel in excess of the annual limit.

In the months leading up to the passage of the bill, there were public debates over the conditioning of military aid to Israel. Some of the Democratic presidential candidates during the primaries said they would leverage aid to Israel to stop the country from annexing parts of the occupied Palestinian Territories.

In June, more than a dozen US legislators pledged to pursue legislation that would condition Washington’s military aid to Israel to ensure that Americans “are not supporting annexation in any way”.

Despite these efforts, no mention of conditioning this aid was mentioned in the House bill.

Report on the war in Yemen

The NDAA calls on the US government to issue an extensive report on the war in Yemen, including Washington’s support for the Saudi-led coalition and civilian casualties.

If the bill becomes law, it would require the presidential administration, which would by then be headed by Joe Biden, to submit a policy report on Yemen within 120 days.

That report must include what actions the US has taken to ease humanitarian suffering, direct US humanitarian assistance, efforts to facilitate humanitarian access to Yemen, and a description of civilian harm including casualties.

Trump’s administration is in the process of designating the Houthi rebel group in Yemen as a terrorist organisation, a move that rights groups say will have a disastrous impact on humanitarian aid and access to the country.

In March 2015, the Saudi-led coalition started a military campaign against the Houthis to restore the government of President Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi. The United Nations has described the conflict as the “worst humanitarian crisis” in the world.

Earlier this year, the administration also significantly reduced aid to Yemen, slashing about $700m.

Some progressives say the bill falls short in not stopping arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which have used US-made weapons for attacks on civilians.

“Shamefully, this bill does nothing to stop arms sales to some of the most corrupt and brutal regimes in the world, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates,” Omar said.

Counter Islamic State Fund

The bill requests hundreds of millions of dollars for security operations in its Counter-ISIS Train and Equip Fund (CTEF), including $645m for security operations in Iraq, and an additional $200m for Syria, which will go towards activities related to countering the presence of the Islamic State (IS) group in both countries.

Since declaring IS defeated in 2018, Trump has repeatedly said that he plans to withdraw the US military presence from the Middle East.

The US military said in September it would be pulling 2,200 troops from Iraq, leaving 3,000 to fight IS. It later added that it would withdraw an additional 500 troops.

While much less of a threat than it was several years ago, IS remains capable of launching a cheap, low-tech and largely rural campaign of violence that continues to cost lives, according to American and Iraqi counterterrorism officials.

General Kenneth McKenzie has estimated that IS still had about 10,000 supporters in the Iraq-Syria region and remains a real threat.

Sanctions on Turkey

The measure also includes a provision that requires the president to issue sanctions against Turkey over its purchase and testing of the Russian-made S-400 missile defence system.

The S-400 purchase by Turkey, a Nato ally, has been an issue of contention between Washington and Ankara.

After the first missile systems were delivered last year to Turkey, the US removed the country from its F-35 fighter jet programme and cancelled the sale of the jets.

The US has threatened Turkey with sanctions over the S-400, but the Trump administration has yet to administer any financial punishments.

The bill, if it becomes law, would make imposing sanctions on Turkey mandatory for the president and give him 30 days to do so.

Ankara has said the S-400 systems would not be integrated into Nato systems so they pose no threat, and it has called for a joint working group.

Ibrahim Kalin, a spokesperson for the Turkish presidency, said on Wednesday that the issue can be addressed and that it is no longer a “technical military issue” but a “political issue”.

“Turkey has been criticised for having good relations with Russia. But there are many issues over which we do not agree with Russia,” he said during a webinar with the German Marshal Fund.

“The Congress’s point of view has been so narrow and one-sided, they are losing sight of the larger picture here,” he said.

Published at www.middleeasteye.net

Erdogan in the Caucasus

Turkey’s Erdogan seems to be doubling down in the Caucasus in search of a victory that might blunt the force of failure everywhere else

By Sayed Abdel-Meguid
14 Oct 2020

Azerbaijan and Armenia declared a truce Saturday, no thanks to Turkey which has been giving Baku all-out political and military support. The ceasefire agreement which was soon violated, was temporary and was for humanitarian reasons.

In fact, Turkish Parliament Speaker Mustafa Sentop called on the government to send Turkish troops to support Azerbaijan. But if Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan thought this earned him a place at the negotiating table in Moscow, he was in for a disappointment. The Kremlin, confident in its influence over both Baku and Yerevan and keen to keep their dispute over Nagorno-Karabakh from spiralling into another international crisis, managed to push the two sides to a ceasefire for “humanitarian purposes”, without help from others.

After drumming up so much public fervour for action against the “occupiers” of a brotherly Turkic people’s land, the Turkish government could not appear to be so inconsequential. So, the state news agency reported that Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu spoke with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, by phone and that Lavrov brought him up to date on the situation in the Caucasus.

Then, Ankara resumed its pro-Azerbaijan propaganda. In a statement released on the day the ceasefire went into effect, the Turkish Foreign Ministry said: “Azerbaijan has proven to Armenia and the world that it is able to regain, on its own, the territory occupied 30 years ago.” Then, as though a self-appointed mouthpiece for Baku, the ministry said: “Azerbaijan has given Yerevan one last chance to withdraw,” adding that Turkey would “support Azerbaijan both on the field of battle and at the negotiating table”.

In the opinion of some quarters of the Turkish opposition, the fiery reaction to the ceasefire was not just pitched to a domestic gallery. It was also a response to the unfavourable mirror the international community was holding up to Ankara, which has been variously accused of stoking tensions over Nagorno-Karabakh, goading Baku to war, providing it with military support and perhaps air cover, and sending in Syrian mercenaries to support Azerbaijani forces. Perhaps this is why Moscow excluded Ankara from the ceasefire negotiations.

For a number of reasons, Turkey sees itself as a key player in Azerbaijan and it resents being sidelined. Now, reports and rumours circulating on the Internet suggest that Anatolian hands are at work to undermine the ceasefire and that Ankara is praying for the Minsk Group, which was formed by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 1992 to find a peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, to fail in its renewed efforts to resolve the conflict.

The group “is almost certain to fail if it doesn’t also involve a detailed plan to end the occupation”, said Presidential Spokesman Ibrahim Kalin on Friday. “Yes to a ceasefire, but the ceasefire must be sustainable, and the only way to make it sustainable is to talk about Armenia’s occupation of Azeri land.”

Given Erdogan’s regional ambitions, ideological outlooks and general temperament, he would be less interested in “talk” than in “beating the iron while it’s hot”, especially now that troops are mustered and arms and mercenaries are in place. Why would he prefer the military option on yet another front?

Some analysts believe that with all his foreign policies and interventions crumbling and backfiring in the Eastern Mediterranean, Syria, Libya and elsewhere, and with all the havoc this has wreaked on the Turkish economy, he feels he has no alternative but to escape forward, and the long-simmering Nagorno-Karabakh conflict presented the opportunity.

There, he could claim a much-needed victory by enabling predominantly ethnically Turkic Azerbaijan to reclaim the small Armenian controlled enclave, which would quell the rumbling volcano at home. Or, at the very least, he could deflect public attention from the mounting economic straits which may soon worsen if Washington finally acts on its decision to impose sanctions on Turkey for its purchase and deployment of the Russian S-400 missile system.

It now appears that the US will no longer be able to postpone this step. When the Turkish military started to move the controversial S-400 batteries to a training area near the Black Sea town of Sinop, the Turkish Ambassador in Washington Serdar Kilic, made a point of denying that they were being used to detect Greek F-16s in the Mediterranean. “That is out of the question. Even if [the S-400s] were tested, we, as a member of NATO, would coordinate such action through the alliance’s military channels”, he said during an event organised by the Washington-based World Affairs Councils.

The previous day, US senators Chris Van Hollen (Democrat) and James Lankford (Republican) urged the State Department to introduce sanctions against Turkey for the planned tests of the Russian made S-400s. They expressed concern over reports that Turkey was using the S-400s to detect and track US-made F-16s on their return to their bases following the Eunomia manoeuvres conducted by France, Italy, Greece and Cyprus in late August.

The senators wrote to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo asking about a report concerning Turkish plans to conduct a comprehensive test of the S-400s and noted that Washington’s failure to act more decisively about the S-400 purchase had “emboldened” Ankara. The US has repeatedly cautioned Turkey regarding its purchase and deployment of the Russian made S-400, which is incompatible with NATO defences and which could put the US’s new F-35s at risk.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, during his recent visit to Ankara, said: “We are concerned about the consequences of Turkey’s acquisition of the S-400 system. The system can pose a risk to Allied aircraft and can lead to US sanctions … [T]he S-400 cannot be integrated into NATO’s air and missile defence system. And I urge Turkey to work with other Allies to find alternative solutions.”

According to Yasar Yakis, a former Turkish foreign minister who was also one of the founding members of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), Ankara has come to regret the S-400 deal. It had acted precipitously and subsequent developments showed that it had not fully assessed the strategic consequences of such a dangerous step. They had not taken into consideration at the time that they were making a choice between Moscow and Brussels, he said.

In short, Turkey has painted itself into a corner, and it appears its customary tactical manoeuvring will not be enough to fix the problem. As a CNN headline on 11 October put it, “Turkey’s combative foreign policy could soon reach a dead end.” As one source quoted in the article put it, “the economy is Erdogan’s Achilles heel, not only domestically but also in foreign policy. Not only does the economy determine if Turkey can continue to flex its muscles, but if the economy tanks, Turkey won’t have the budget to devote to all these battles and fronts.”

The EU Executive Commission has recently confirmed this. On 6 October, it said that Turkey’s government was undermining its economy, eroding democracy and destroying independent courts, leaving its bid to join the EU further away than ever.

*A version of this article appears in print in the 15 October, 2020 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly

Published at english.ahram.org.eg/

‘US Believing It Can Buy S-400s from Ankara is Tragicomic’ – Retired Turkish Air Force Maj. Gen.

3.07.2020

Republican US Senator John Thune on 30 June suggested purchasing and removing the Turkish-owned Russian-built S-400s from Ankara, in a bid to break a deadlock over weapons which Washington claims are incompatible with NATO security standards and might compromise operations of the new fifth-generation F-35 fighter jets.

Retired Turkish Air Force Major General Beyazit Karatas commented on a GOP proposal to purchase Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile systems from Turkey, noting first that the implementation of such an initiative is impossible:

“I find it tragicomic that US senators introduce such amendments, even allowing the very idea”.

He stressed that there were binding articles under interstate agreements for the sale of weapons at this scale. “For international arms purchases, a state guarantee is provided”, he said.

Karatas pointed out that there is an “end-user certificate” and all parties must necessarily sign. Without the consent of the country of origin, you cannot sell the weapon to a third party because you are legally responsible. Official statements made by Turkey indicate that the S-400 agreement will be fully respected.

To clarify the issue, Karatas gave an example in the case of American military equipment procurement.

“Let’s assume this situation: we bought, say, Patriot systems, and then relations with the United States due to sanctions and the embargo went sharply and irreparably wrong. Can we sell Patriot to a third country and buy a better air defence system from them and sell the F-16 on top of that? The answer is “no”. The US will intervene immediately and accuse us of violating the agreement”, he said.

According to Karatas, the major reason US senators have been so detached from current reality is that they consider themselves the leader of the world.

Tomorrow, the US will resort to the same practice again but on a different subject. The blackmailer will use his options to the last. What’s important here is what the pressure side will do”.

Karatas emphasised that the S-400 is an air defence missile system, not designed to be used as an offensive weapon. He added that it would be clearly used against an enemy that would threaten the security of Turkey.

“The system will not be targeted directly against NATO but against air threats from an attacking enemy, regardless of its belonging to the Alliance”, he clarified.

Karatas also stressed that, despite the US pressure, Turkey will not give up the S-400. According to him, the system is effectively operational. After the first stage of personnel training, the process of “completing combat training” will proceed, and training will continue uninterrupted at various levels throughout the operational cycle, as long as the S-400 is in Turkish army service.

“There is no turning back in the S-400 issue and there can be none. Undoubtedly, political and economic decisions affect our lives and will continue to do so. And in this sense, the implementation of the agreement signed between Turkey and Russia on the supply of the S-400 is of great importance in terms of ensuring Turkey’s security, maintaining its respect and confidence in the international arena and cooperation with neighbouring countries”, Karatas said.

Earlier, US Senate Majority Whip John Thune introduced legislation that would allow the United States to buy Turkey’s Russian-made S-400 defence system, the purchase of which by Ankara in 2019 caused Washington to expel the nation from its F-35 jet fighter program and threaten to impose sanctions on the country. According to the White House, S-400 systems may allegedly compromise F-35 jet operations and fail to meet NATO standards. Ankara harshly condemned the US move, calling it illegal and unsubstantiated, and reminding that Turkey had funded the jets costly development.

Turkey’s Critical ‘S-400 Moment’ Has Arrived

By Can Kasapoglu
May 4, 2020

Due to the coronavirus pandemic, Ankara has apparently postponed the activation of the S-400 air-defense missile system it had purchased from Russia that had been planned for April 2020 (Hurriyet Daily News, April 29). Regardless of the COVID-19 justification, Turkey’s decision was, in fact, motivated by a number of entirely unrelated factors, and the country now stands at a crossroads between several political-military scenarios.

The term “activation” is rather vague in a military context, as can be seen when comparing the divergent Turkish and Chinese S-400 acquisition timelines. In July 2019, the first components of the S-400 arrived in Turkey (Sabah, July 13, 2019). And within the next two months, Ankara sent Turkish air force personnel to Russia for training (Anadolu Agency, September 4, 2019). Subsequently, in November 2019, Turkey tested the purchased system’s radars against its F-16 and the F-4 aircraft (Hurriyet Daily News, November 26, 2019). Footage of this assessment clearly showed the Russian-made surface-to-air missile (SAM) system’s “Big Bird” acquisition radar and “Cheese Board” early-warning radar actively scanning the Turkish skies (Hurriyet Daily News, November 25, 2019). In January 2020, Russia delivered the final shipment of the purchased air-defense units, including 120 interceptors (TASS, January 20). At that point, the only remaining step for Ankara to undertake was a live-fire exercise involving the S-400s.

In the Chinese case, the S-400 deliveries from Russia all took place between May 2018 and July 2018 (TASS, July 26, 2018). The People’s Liberation Army then conducted live-fire drills in November 2018 (The Diplomat, December 28, 2018). Notably, the United States imposed the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA—in part targeting countries that purchase weapons and military hardware from Russia) on Chinese persons and entities in September 2018, prior to the live-fire S-400 test (Yeni Safak, September 20, 2018).

The text of CAATSA says nothing about a country having to first “activate” Russian arms as a prerequisite to coming under US sanctions. Rather, the act extends financial penalties to legal state entities, businesses and individuals who “engage in a significant transaction with a person that is part of, or operates for or on behalf of, the defense or intelligence sectors of the Government of the Russian Federation” (Treasury.gov, August 2, 2017). Although the “significant transactions” wording is itself ambiguous, the Chinese example leaves no doubt that high-end Russian weaponry—such as the S-400 SAM system and Su-35 combat aircraft—would constitute a potential trigger for CAATSA sanctions.

In Turkey’s situation, the focus on “activation” of the Russian-purchased S-400s has all along served as a diplomatic way out of the sanctions crisis that arose between it and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ally, the United States. Indeed, this threshold was first voiced by US Senator Lindsey Graham and Secretary of State Michael Pompeo in mid-2019, following the initial S-400 deliveries (Anadolu Agency, July 26, 2019).

Ankara has now postponed crossing this key red line for several reasons. First, the world will register a drastic downfall in military expenditures following the pandemic. Turkey cannot run the risk of provoking US sanctions at times of wavering defense economics. Second, militarily, the S-400 will not improve Turkish capabilities sufficiently to risk falling afoul of CAATSA, particularly in the middle of a global economic crisis. Modern missile defenses depend on sensors integrated within a network-centric architecture. However, Turkey has said it plans to operate the S-400 as a standalone system (Hurriyet Daily News, January 8, 2019), which will unavoidably undermine its operational effectiveness against incoming missiles. One may assume that the S-400 could instead chiefly play an air-defense role, especially since the Turkish Air Force has been suffering from a low pilot-to-cockpit ratio in recent years (Yeni Safak, August 16, 2016). Theoretically, SAM-centric or even balanced air-defense planning might even offer some advantages compared to fighter aircraft–dominant doctrinal orders of battle: SAM systems come with lower operational costs and less demand for complex infrastructure. However, exacerbating the CAATSA would still be quite dangerous for Turkey, especially taking into consideration that China’s main procurement body was targeted by the sanctions. If Ankara faced a similar pattern, Turkey could find itself isolated from the Euro-Atlantic defense ecosystem. Finally, going through with the S-400 purchase despite the serious pressure from Turkey’s NATO allies did little, if any, good when it came to altering Russian activities in Libya and Syria. Politically, bearing the costs of CAATSA is, thus, arguably too high for Ankara at the moment.

Following its “postponement,” Turkey faces at least four potential future scenarios depending on its next steps:

In the “great expectations scenario,” Turkey could further delay declaring the S-400 operational in the hope it may be saved by President Donald Trump. Yet, even if the US chief executive secures a second term, his influence over the Congress could be limited next year, depending on the outcome of a number of key legislative races this fall (Euronews, May 1, 2020).

In the “transatlantic re-alignment scenario,” Turkey would mothball the S-400 in return for resuming its participation in the F-35 fifth-generation stealth fighter program.

In the “sanctions scenario,” Ankara might officially announce the establishment of its first S-400 regiment after weathering the coronavirus. CAATSA sanctions would inevitably follow, but the impact of this course would be determined by the scope of the financial penalties. Nevertheless, having seemingly undermined NATO cohesion and even made money for doing so, Russia would be the clear winner under such an outcome.

Finally, one may speculate about a “wildcard scenario.” In the 2008 Five-Day War, Georgian air defenses scored unexpected kills against Russian aircraft, including a Tu-22M bomber. Apparently, Tbilisi’s earlier cooperation with Kyiv helped Georgia’s Armed Forces to master the Soviet-era SAM systems under their command (The Military Review, November–December, 2009). Today, Turkey and Ukraine also enjoy burgeoning military ties. The Soviet-legacy Ukrainian defense technological and industrial base could, thus, be a lucrative source for the Turkish military and arms manufacturers to better understand the design philosophy behind the S-400 that Ankara has just procured. Indeed, Ankara may want to lean on the Soviet-Russian technological legacy for its own future strategic defensive weapons development. After all, Turkey’s present offensive strategic weapons program is based on the B-611 tactical ballistic missile system, procured from China decades ago (Vatan, January 8, 2020). Of course, this low-probability/high-impact scenario will heavily depend on the Turkish government’s ability to keep such an effort hidden from the Kremlin.