Turkey - Geopolitical & Geostrategic.

[Traveller]

Turkish Government demands the Syrian Government stop trying to recapture Idlib province which borders Turkey:

Turkish defense minister says Syrian forces must halt attacks

The Turkish Government is worried about humanitarian affairs? I guess that is why the Turkish invasion force has heavy artillery and Main Battle Tanks. In my humble estimation the land seized by the Turks will remain occupied to split Syrian and Turkish Kurds.

 

[Feanor]

Turkish Government demands the Syrian Government stop trying to recapture Idlib province which borders Turkey:

Turkish defense minister says Syrian forces must halt attacks

The Turkish Government is worried about humanitarian affairs? I guess that is why the Turkish invasion force has heavy artillery and Main Battle Tanks. In my humble estimation the land seized by the Turks will remain occupied to split Syrian and Turkish Kurds.

It's vague noises meant to show support for the rebels. In all likelihood the Turks at least tacitly signed off on the current SAA offensive. And of course, the offensive isn't really even in Idlib right now, they're mostly trying to clear out the nothern parts of Hama province. If they keep going, they will hit Idlib, but its unclear whether that will actually happen.

 

[Traveller]

The Syrian army might be interested in Hama province but the Turkish bases are to the east. Coincidentally on the land claimed by Kurds . I posted the article as I near choked on the sheer hide of the Turkish FM citing humanitarian concerns. I still believe those 10(?) bases are there for the long haul. I agree with you re Idlib but I'm unclear as to why the Turks would make noises. So far they have had a politically clear run with their expeditionary force.

 

[Feanor]

The Syrian army might be interested in Hama province but the Turkish bases are to the east. Coincidentally on the land claimed by Kurds . I posted the article as I near choked on the sheer hide of the Turkish FM citing humanitarian concerns. I still believe those 10(?) bases are there for the long haul. I agree with you re Idlib but I'm unclear as to why the Turks would make noises. So far they have had a politically clear run with their expeditionary force.

A lot of their own rebel proxies have been routinely accusing the Turks in general and Erdogan in particular of selling them out to Russia and Assad. I strongly suspect they're doing this so they can say they did it.

 

[ngatimozart]

Looks like turkey may be spoiling for a fight with Greece and Cyprus over a natural gas field off the Cypriot coast. Because of political trouble at home, it appears Erdogan is attempting to deflect attention by creating a foreign crisis. The interesting point will be how NATO and the EU react to this if Turkey do use military force. According to the article Turkish military aircraft are already breaching Greek airspace daily.

Turkey Is Hungry for War With Cyprus

 

[John Fedup]

At the very least, it will be Turkexit as far as continued NATO membership is concerned and some increased business opportunities for F-35 users. EU membership, never happening with Erdogan in power and minimal with someone else in charge.

 

[Feanor]

The US has issued a statement giving Turkey until June 3rd to cancel the S-400 buy or face sanctions and removal from the F-35 program.

In my personal opinion this sort of heavy-handed and open imperialism will not get the US good results in this case. Erdogan is going to dig in his heels, and other US allies and partners are going to take note.

Turkey IGNORES USA ultimatum as military travels to Russia for S-400 missile training

 

[John Fedup]

IMHO these actions are hardly heavy handled. A supposed ally and manufacturing partner is exposing a military "crown jewel" to a NATO adversary by acquiring the S-400. I imagine the S-400 discount will be substantial when Turkey allows Russian engineers to tweak their systems with access to Turkish F-35s. This is why sanctions and removal from the F-35 party are on the table. The only note taking by allies will be, "it's about bloody time".

 

[Feanor]

IMHO these actions are hardly heavy handled. A supposed ally and manufacturing partner is exposing a military "crown jewel" to a NATO adversary by acquiring the S-400. I imagine the S-400 discount will be substantial when Turkey allows Russian engineers to tweak their systems with access to Turkish F-35s. This is why sanctions and removal from the F-35 party are on the table. The only note taking by allies will be, "it's about bloody time".

A few points. Is there any evidence to suggest that Turkey intends to do this? It strikes me as a fairly big leap to go from "they bought Russian weapons" to "they will sell US military secrets to Russia". And if that was the plan wouldn't it make more sense to pretend to cancel the S-400 deal, let the F-35s get delivered, then sign the deal with Russia and give them all the access? Third point, given the posturing, it's pretty obvious that Erdogan has become obstinate because the US is pressuring him. Remember, the initial winner of the Turkish air defense tender was China, and the US wasn't too happy about that either. It doesn't look like a legitimate concern, unless there's a whole lot we're not seeing or hearing about. It's far likelier that this is yet another heavy-handed attempt by the US to reign in those who would oppose the US, and a spectacular failure at that. And the F-35 isn't just a product, Turkey is a partner in the program. If you can kick them out, who else is in danger if they dare buy from someone the US doesn't approve of?

 

[barney41]

IIRC a major concern with the S400 is it would.not be able to be integrated into NATO's air defense network. Aside from technical issues, integration would pose unacceptable risk to the security and integrity of NATO air defenses.

 

[OPSSG]

IIRC a major concern with the S400 is it would.not be able to be integrated into NATO's air defense network. Aside from technical issues, integration would pose unacceptable risk to the security and integrity of NATO air defenses.

Is the issue related to the sharing the radar picture and the need to integrate IFF into the whole theatre picture for NATO and this poses a security risk?

 

[Ranger25]

A good take on US-Turkish relations from the the Think tank at The Hudson institute. Thoughts are there’s plenty of blame on both sides for the downward spiral of the relationship. They agree the heavy pressure from the US is playing well into Erdogan hands





https://news.usni.org/2019/05/22/pa...g-russian-air-defense-system-has-deeper-roots

 

[Feanor]

A good take on US-Turkish relations from the the Think tank at The Hudson institute. Thoughts are there’s plenty of blame on both sides for the downward spiral of the relationship. They agree the heavy pressure from the US is playing well into Erdogan hands





Panel: US/Turkey Dispute Over Buying Russian Air Defense System Has Deeper Roots - USNI News

I don't know. I'm not entirely convinced that Erdogan is all that excited about the prospect of opposing the US, but I think that when the US takes a hard stance it backs him into a corner, where he feels the need to look strong. I strongly suspect that if the US made some concessions to Erdogan's foreign policy ambitions, and publicly talked about the value of Turkey as an ally and a partner, that would go further in de-escalating and bringing Turkey into the fold then this strong stance. I also think that the concessions to his foreign policy ambitions have to be substantial, on par with the Russian offering. Not a symbolic gesture or a token involvement in a US effort in Syria or Iraq.

 

[Todjaeger]

A few points. Is there any evidence to suggest that Turkey intends to do this? It strikes me as a fairly big leap to go from "they bought Russian weapons" to "they will sell US military secrets to Russia". And if that was the plan wouldn't it make more sense to pretend to cancel the S-400 deal, let the F-35s get delivered, then sign the deal with Russia and give them all the access? Third point, given the posturing, it's pretty obvious that Erdogan has become obstinate because the US is pressuring him. Remember, the initial winner of the Turkish air defense tender was China, and the US wasn't too happy about that either. It doesn't look like a legitimate concern, unless there's a whole lot we're not seeing or hearing about. It's far likelier that this is yet another heavy-handed attempt by the US to reign in those who would oppose the US, and a spectacular failure at that. And the F-35 isn't just a product, Turkey is a partner in the program. If you can kick them out, who else is in danger if they dare buy from someone the US doesn't approve of?

I tend to disagree with this assessment, and based past off past sales of advanced military kit (by the US and Russia/Soviet Union) I suspect there is indeed some pertinent bits that are not in the public domain.

In addition to the potential issues associated with integrating (or trying to integrate) an S-400 system in a NATO IADS, I suspect there would be concerns about the setup and thru-life support for S-400 systems, and what information could potentially be gathered by those providing such support, especially if systems like the F-35 are also being operated by Turkey.

 

[Feanor]

I tend to disagree with this assessment, and based past off past sales of advanced military kit (by the US and Russia/Soviet Union) I suspect there is indeed some pertinent bits that are not in the public domain.

In addition to the potential issues associated with integrating (or trying to integrate) an S-400 system in a NATO IADS, I suspect there would be concerns about the setup and thru-life support for S-400 systems, and what information could potentially be gathered by those providing such support, especially if systems like the F-35 are also being operated by Turkey.

It raises questions. Israel and the US are flying F-35s all around the Middle East, within view of Russian radars at Kmeimeem and Tartus, as well as ELINT assets. And this isn't information leaking during lifetime maintenance, this is actual Russian gear. And if we're looking at any maintenance personnel doing life support for the system as leaks, how is Greece able to operate their S-300s or Tor-M1s? There are plenty of NATO members that operate Russia/Soviet gear in some form, and have used Russia for maintenance and support. Turkey themselves has bought Russian gear in the past. And it seems to me that we're assuming the Turks are pretty stupid/incompetent (either that or you'd have to think they're willing to leak the info) that they can't maintain security over a few contractors working on their SAMs.

 

[Ananda]

If I may to add, cause this's Turkey's S-400 procurement saga is basically politics and no reasonable/undebateable military technical argument that can be put on arguing Turkish procurement of S-400 endanger F-35 secret.

Is basically CAATSA. Wish the American just say that, and don't argue on incompatibilty of the system or potential leaking of F-35 data. Saying potential leaking, seems saying Turkey is incapable to keep out Russian technicians on getting F-35 data.
This basically saying that Turkey is untrustworthy, while Greece is trustworthy even when they also operating Russian SAM system.

Greece acquired Russian system before CAATSA being enforced, while Turkey procured this after that.
Arguing on technical matters, just like they do it in Congress is degenerating to US Allies (if US still see Turkey is their Allies). Just tell Turkey this is a matter of CAATSA, thus US wants everyone that using their 'advance' Military equipment to follow CAATSA, and not buying any Russian equipment.

CAATSA is not having anything to do on technicality on integrating Russian Equipment with NATO's standard equipment. I believe Turkey is capable enough on their own to integrate Russian system with NATO standard equipment. As long as they can get the Russian to give them source code of S-400 then they can do it on their own.

In fact, seems Russia in this case that (in term on source coding secret) has more potential on Military technical Risk by has to share their S-400 source database with a NATO member. US in fact can benefit more with this, as they can (behind back door) to ask Turkey on S-400 technical as 'officially' Turkey is their Allies and not Russian.

Telling in congress on Turkish potential leaking of F-35 data to Russia by simply buying Russian SAM, is equivalent in Turkish public in saying that US don't trust Turkey on integrity issue.
From Turkey perspective, by saying on technical issue is the problem, they will say US bias on them, since they (US) have no problem on Greece using Russian system.

Just say this is CAATSA issue period, and don't put this argument on technical defense risk issue. If US really still want Turkey on their camp.

 

[Todjaeger]

If I may to add, cause this's Turkey's S-400 procurement saga is basically politics and no reasonable/undebateable military technical argument that can be put on arguing Turkish procurement of S-400 endanger F-35 secret.

Is basically CAATSA. Wish the American just say that, and don't argue on incompatibilty of the system or potential leaking of F-35 data. Saying potential leaking, seems saying Turkey is incapable to keep out Russian technicians on getting F-35 data.
This basically saying that Turkey is untrustworthy, while Greece is trustworthy even when they also operating Russian SAM system.

Greece acquired Russian system before CAATSA being enforced, while Turkey procured this after that.
Arguing on technical matters, just like they do it in Congress is degenerating to US Allies (if US still see Turkey is their Allies). Just tell Turkey this is a matter of CAATSA, thus US wants everyone that using their 'advance' Military equipment to follow CAATSA, and not buying any Russian equipment.

CAATSA is not having anything to do on technicality on integrating Russian Equipment with NATO's standard equipment. I believe Turkey is capable enough on their own to integrate Russian system with NATO standard equipment. As long as they can get the Russian to give them source code of S-400 then they can do it on their own.

In fact, seems Russia in this case that (in term on source coding secret) has more potential on Military technical Risk by has to share their S-400 source database with a NATO member. US in fact can benefit more with this, as they can (behind back door) to ask Turkey on S-400 technical as 'officially' Turkey is their Allies and not Russian.

Telling in congress on Turkish potential leaking of F-35 data to Russia by simply buying Russian SAM, is equivalent in Turkish public in saying that US don't trust Turkey on integrity issue.
From Turkey perspective, by saying on technical issue is the problem, they will say US bias on them, since they (US) have no problem on Greece using Russian system.

Just say this is CAATSA issue period, and don't put this argument on technical defense risk issue. If US really still want Turkey on their camp.

I would need to a bit of research on some of the arguments being made back when Greece was looking at getting S-300 systems, but I do recall there being some grumbling about incorporating a Russian SAM system into a NATO member's OrBat, in part because of what some of the potential SIGINT gains could be had by Russia. The concern with Turkey would be even greater IMO, since the S-400 is supposed to be a more capable system, providing a greater area of coverage. Add in the fact that Turkey has a number of programmes which could provide an even greater scope for SIGINT gains than Greece, with the F-35 and the B737 Peace Eagle coming to my mind immediately.

Part of the concern about access and dissemination I would consider "normal", given US examples like the FMS process and ITARS, which can put some fairly strict access limits to US kit even for US allies like France, and fellow NATO member Germany. The other part of the concern with regards to Turkey I believe is due to the uncertainty surrounding what direction the current Turkish gov't is moving the country in, and/or what arrangements might be put into place between elements within Turkey and various regional and international powers.

 

[John Fedup]

@Todjaeger ...your last sentence is really the key issue in all this. Erdogan is the problem not the S-400 so much. Having a F135 engine maintenance site in Turkey makes no sense from a security POV either.

 

[Feanor]

I would need to a bit of research on some of the arguments being made back when Greece was looking at getting S-300 systems, but I do recall there being some grumbling about incorporating a Russian SAM system into a NATO member's OrBat, in part because of what some of the potential SIGINT gains could be had by Russia.

Iirc the systems were bought by Cyprus and transferred to Greece over Turkish concerns. Greece also bought Tor-M1 SHORAD as companion systems to the S-300s.

The concern with Turkey would be even greater IMO, since the S-400 is supposed to be a more capable system, providing a greater area of coverage. Add in the fact that Turkey has a number of programmes which could provide an even greater scope for SIGINT gains than Greece, with the F-35 and the B737 Peace Eagle coming to my mind immediately.

I'm a little lost on this. Are you able to explain, specifically, how the S-400 poses a SIGINT risk? Are they worried that Russian maintenance personnel will download information on the F-35? Because this seems like something they ought to be able to control.

Part of the concern about access and dissemination I would consider "normal", given US examples like the FMS process and ITARS, which can put some fairly strict access limits to US kit even for US allies like France, and fellow NATO member Germany. The other part of the concern with regards to Turkey I believe is due to the uncertainty surrounding what direction the current Turkish gov't is moving the country in, and/or what arrangements might be put into place between elements within Turkey and various regional and international powers.

Well this was my point from the get go. In my opinion the true motivations are political, there is on the one hand uncertainty about the future of Turkey geopolitically speaking. On the other hand there is a desire to hit them for what they have already done, and this is being offered as a chance to go back to being in the US orbit. This is also why Erdogan is responding the way he is. It's not about the S-400s whose actual military value isn't as great as the F-35 program. It's about the fact that he can't be seen, and doesn't want in fact, to have Turkey as a US satellite state. This is why, in my opinion, if the US values having Turkey as an ally, they should have offered Erdogan what he wanted, his own zone of influence in Northern Syria, and some support for his plans to be a regional power. By giving him permission to do a few things, the US could keep him from doing others. And I strongly suspect that Turkey does value their relationship with the US, they just need the nature of that relationship to be more equitable. In my opinion the roots of the growing US-Turkey rift as the same as the roots of the Russia-US rift; the unwillingness of the US to treat these countries as anything close to equal partners.

 

[Todjaeger]

Well this was my point from the get go. In my opinion the true motivations are political, there is on the one hand uncertainty about the future of Turkey geopolitically speaking. On the other hand there is a desire to hit them for what they have already done, and this is being offered as a chance to go back to being in the US orbit. This is also why Erdogan is responding the way he is. It's not about the S-400s whose actual military value isn't as great as the F-35 program. It's about the fact that he can't be seen, and doesn't want in fact, to have Turkey as a US satellite state. This is why, in my opinion, if the US values having Turkey as an ally, they should have offered Erdogan what he wanted, his own zone of influence in Northern Syria, and some support for his plans to be a regional power. By giving him permission to do a few things, the US could keep him from doing others. And I strongly suspect that Turkey does value their relationship with the US, they just need the nature of that relationship to be more equitable. In my opinion the roots of the growing US-Turkey rift as the same as the roots of the Russia-US rift; the unwillingness of the US to treat these countries as anything close to equal partners.

My reading of the tea leaves is somewhat different from yours, it would seem.

For me, it is more a matter of trust than equality. If the US starts to distrust a nation and/or gov't/leader because of the direction they are going in terms of military, diplomatic, economic, or social posture etc. that will absolutely impact the US-foreign nation's relationship.

In order for Turkey to be able to purchase S-400 from Russia, especially being a NATO member, it would be logical that certain agreements would be either required, or already in place, prior to the purchase, as well as the Russian-Turkish relationship would need to be in a certain place. By way of example, a different NATO member like Canada could not simply have their FM ring the Russian Ambassador to Canada and place an order for S-400 for the Canadian Armed Forces.

As a result of that, the US would logically be concerned about that Russian-Turkish relationship, in addition to the cracks in the US-Turkish relationship, and then the potential the S-400 could be used to compromise some/all F-35 LO capabilities. In addition to that, there would logically be US concerns that Turkish F-35 information could make it's way to Russia through a variety of different routes.

As for the US-Russian rift being due to anything resembling the US being unwilling to consider Russia as an equal or near-equal partner, that IMO is absolute nonsense. Russia (then the Soviet Union) has not been a "partner" of the US since WWII, and honestly the Cold War was already underway well before V-E Day.