What's new

Ankara’s move to Chinese air systems appals NATO allies

Saithan

MEMBER
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
3,771
Reaction score
1
Ankara leans toward selecting Chinese long-range anti-missile and air defense systems while NATO allies look shocked by the possibility of the decision


Turkey’s western allies look puzzled by a looming decision by Ankara to select Chinese long-range anti-missile and air defense systems which they think cannot be integrated into the NATO-sponsored early warning architecture currently deployed on Turkish soil.

“That would certainly leave many of us speechless,” said one senior diplomat from a NATO country. “Turkey has every right to choose its own air defense system but we do not quite understand the logic of opting for a Chinese system with no interoperability with the existing [NATO] assets.”

A NATO ally defense attaché in Ankara said that deploying a Chinese air defense system to protect Turkish airspace could have political repercussions. “Questioning Turkey’s geopolitical trajectory would then be legitimate,” he said.

Turkey’s defense procurement officials are about to wrap up their assessment on four rival solutions in a multibillion dollar program to build advanced long-range anti-missile and air defense systems, strongly leaning toward the Chinese bid. One defense official said that the government had come to the conclusion that the Chinese proposal was technologically satisfactory, allowed sufficient levels of technology transfer and was much cheaper than rival solutions. He said that the decision to select the Chinese contender was awaiting final approvals from Defense Minister Ismet Yilmaz and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Turkey in January restructured the $4 billion program, dubbed T-LORAMIDS, which had originally been constructed as an off-the-shelf purchase.

The contenders’ off-the-shelf bids would remain valid, but the country’s procurement office, the Undersecretariat for Defense Industries (SSM), would ask bidders to submit parallel, co-production solutions. Erdoğan had given orders for the launch of feasibility studies on the “potential co-production” of the system.

The same month, SSM wrote to the bidders and asked them to send letters of intent for any co-production deal. The bidders are a U.S. partnership of Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, offering the Patriot air defense system; Russia’s Rosoboronexport, marketing the S-300; China’s CPMIEC (China Precision Machinery Export-Import Corp.), offering its HQ-9; and the Italian-French consortium Eurosam, maker of the SAMP/T Aster 30. T-LORAMIDS, has been designed to counter both enemy aircraft and missiles. Turkey presently has no long-range air-defense systems.

Integration problem worries

Western diplomats warn that Turkey may be deprived of the capability to integrate the Chinese-Turkish system into Turkey’s mostly NATO-owned early warning assets.

“I cannot comment on how the [U.S.] administration would react to that. But I can tell you that integrating a Chinese or Chinese-Turkish air defense system into NATO assets may not be a good idea,” a U.S. diplomat said.

Defense sources admit that U.S. officials had warned the “procurement bureaucracy” several times about the potential difficulties in achieving interoperability if Turkey decided to go for a Chinese or a Russian architecture.

“I see that the Turks remain defiant. But I do not think it would be practically possible to integrate neither the air defense nor the anti-missile components of the planned Turkish-Chinese architecture into NATO radars,” a London-based Turkey specialist said. “The Turks would have the same problem if they chose the Russian system, but I think for the Americans China represents a more direct threat.”

About half of Turkey’s network-based air defense picture (radars) have been paid for by NATO, according to a defense official. They are part of the NATO Air Defense Ground Environment. “Turkey can always decide to build a standalone system. But in that case, abstracting the air defense system from NATO assets would mean that Turkey will lose half of its radar capabilities,” said one defense analyst.

He said Turkey would need interface data to make its own air defense architecture interoperable with NATO assets, primarily data on the Identify Friend and Foe system. “This is top secret and cannot be installed into any Chinese system,” the analyst said.

Another major question, he said, is “how would Turkey have in its possession a made-in-China IFF system, and how would that system be integrated into its fleet of F-16 aircraft?”

“There is an important degree of incompatibility here and all in all any Chinese-Turkish co-production program would look problematic,” he said.

July/02/2013

DEFENSE UPDATE - Ankara
 
. . .
Turkey has the right to choose anything he want.

That's not the problem, of course they do, the problem is about compatibility.

Turkey's defense are based on NATO defense systems, Integrating Chinese defense systems into NATO defense systems would be like trying to fit a round ball into a triangular hole, it just doesn't work.
 
.
That's not the problem, of course they do, the problem is about compatibility.

Turkey's defense are based on NATO defense systems, Integrating Chinese defense systems into NATO defense systems would be like trying to fit a round ball into a triangular hole, it just doesn't work.

I am sure that all of those possibilities are already been considered by our guys, if we go for Chienese architecture I suppose that's for one reason.
 
. .
It's very easy. Especially after the
testing TAI's ÖZGÜR program in
the Exercise ISIK'13. ÖZGÜR chose
F-4s as prototype. But in that
exercise we tried it on our F-16
(both block 40/50/50 CCIP). And
according to the head of TAI. It
was very successful. For those
don't know what ÖZGÜR is, it is
an independent IFF system
developted by TAI to the Turkish
Air Force.
What I mean is, after completing
the ÖZGÜR, It will recieve NATO
Classifications but it will be us
that chose who as Friend or Foe.
HQ-9 can be easily integrated
into Turkish made ÖZGÜR. Which
it will automatically fit with NATO
systems.
Greece couldn't manage to
integrate it's S-300s because
they don't have their own IFF
program.

That's just a copy of my post from the other thread.
 
.
prime time baby.

This is what it's about. The fact that a country such as turkey is even considering it is a sign of maturity by the Chinese defense industry.

Any doubt that China will soon be the number three military power and exporter should be gone.

As to Nato getting their hands on it, Turkey use to be Ottoman empire, they are a sometime ally of the West, but I'm not sure they are ready or willing to submit to the West.

There are Turkey members here, do Turkey want it's own economic and military future? I would assume so, with the rich history of the Turks.

If it is the case, then why would Turkey show it to others, besides, China is always developing new tech, by the time NATO gets the chance to figures a thing or two about it, it won't be useful.

And as always, China and US won't go to war for any reason, as we both got too much egg in the other's basket.
 
.
Im still convinced its just a counterbalance act from our side to get a better price from the ''western''contenders.
 
.
I am not sure why everyone is assuming that we'll be integrating HQ-9 with our NATO systems. I think we're going to try our hand on a non NATO system and see if what everyone keeps being hysteric about is true.

of course we could just overcome that barrier and literally shatter that wall called NATO >< Non-NATO

Thus opening up for more hardcore competition West vs. East.
 
.
That's not the problem, of course they do, the problem is about compatibility.

Turkey's defense are based on NATO defense systems, Integrating Chinese defense systems into NATO defense systems would be like trying to fit a round ball into a triangular hole, it just doesn't work.

Because Some others has failed to really intergrate their systems ? We have already done this ,we can make our Defense Systems in 15 Years ,but we already the capability to intergrate any systems for our Forces.

There are Norms like from NATO ,but Turkey must not do anything what NATO wants.

Turkey is only a Strategic Parnter for the NATO. That´s have said the USA.
 
.
The one that is most generous to transfer/share of technology for the best price should be choosen...
 
.
In my Opinion is the S300 the best choose ,i mean last i have hear something about that Russia and Turkey will develop in Turkey together the S-300.

S-300 is a Really Monster.

S-300 is better then HQ-9.
 
.
Because Some others has failed to really intergrate their systems ? We have already done this ,we can make our Defense Systems in 15 Years ,but we already the capability to intergrate any systems for our Forces.

There are Norms like from NATO ,but Turkey must not do anything what NATO wants.

Turkey is only a Strategic Parnter for the NATO. That´s have said the USA.

That's completly wrong man. TURKEY is one of 13 founder members of NATO (We didn't found it. But We're at that status).

About the Strategic Partnership. It's to describe the dual relations between US-Turkey. France, UK and Germany are USA's Strategic Partners too. It's just too classify the level of dual relations between US and other countries.
 
.
That's completly wrong man. TURKEY is one of 13 founder members of NATO (We didn't found it. But We're at that status).

About the Strategic Partnership. It's to describe the dual relations between US-Turkey. France, UK and Germany are USA's Strategic Partners too. It's just too classify the level of dual relations between US and other countries.

I don´t think so ,i mean at last they don´t wanna sell us MQ-1 Predator etc. Don´t think that was a relationship between US and other Countries.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom