Category: Eastern Europe

  • Turkey Considers Procuring American or Russian Attack Helicopters

    Turkey Considers Procuring American or Russian Attack Helicopters

    Turkey Considers Procuring American or Russian Attack Helicopters

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 116
    June 17, 2009
    By: Saban Kardas
    Undersecretary of Defense Industries Murad Bayar told reporters that he is optimistic about the purchase of Super Cobra helicopters from the U.S. Navy, amidst reports that a Turkish delegation is visiting Moscow to discuss the procurement of Russian MI-28 helicopters. In a stalled bid, the Turkish military has been eyeing additional strike helicopters as a stop-gap measure to meet its needs until its own national attack helicopter project becomes operational.

    Attack helicopters have been on Turkey’s defense procurement agenda since the 1990’s. In order to increase the army’s effectiveness in combating the PKK, Ankara designated attack helicopters as an urgent requirement, and developed multi-million dollar programs to meet the army’s needs. Following the purchase of several Cobra class platforms, the subsequent tenders Turkey opened were cancelled due to price disputes, licenses and technology transfers and the changing political climate. Consistent with Turkish military procurement policy after 2004, it initiated a national helicopter gunship program.

    However, due to the stringent regulations on local participation and technology transfers, American firms could not participate in tenders, and Turkey eventually awarded the contract for the production of its national attack/tactical-reconnaissance helicopters to the Italian AgustaWestland. Under the $3 billion project, the Turkish army will acquire 50 T129 helicopters, a modified version of the Italian Mangusta-A129. The deliveries were expected to start in 2013, but some sources claim that this date be pushed back to 2015 (EDM, June 27, 2008).

    Criticism surrounding Turkey’s military modernization program has continued unabated. According to its critics, Turkey’s handling of the helicopter project since the outset reveals poor planning and the lack of direction within the defense industry. Many ambitious weapons systems including main battle tanks, assault helicopters and UAV’s are to be produced domestically, but their design and prototypes will not be ready before 2012. Critics claim that “if the development of those projects was not followed closely, the Turkish defense industry might face a serious crisis in 2012 after falling short of meeting the real needs of the Turkish armed forces” (EDM, January 6).

    Meanwhile, the Turkish army reported deficiencies in combating the PKK caused by the delays in the helicopter program, especially after the escalation of the PKK’s terrorist campaign in recent years. The helicopters within the Turkish military inventory, mostly Cobra class, are aging and fall short of the army’s operational meets. This situation lends credibility to the critics’ arguments, since although an attack helicopter project was considered as urgent in the 1990’s, it remains unfinished -and it will take several years before the army will acquire the quantities it needs.

    Realizing that even under the most optimistic estimates national attack helicopters will not be delivered before 2013-2015, as a short term measure Turkey approached the United States in late 2007 to purchase up to 12 Cobra class helicopters already in use by the U.S. navy. U.S. sources said that they were in short supply. Since operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have overstretched U.S. military resources, Washington declined the Turkish requests (Turkish Daily News, March 28, 2008). Instead it offered Turkey AH-64 Apaches, but Ankara did not want them since having operated Cobras for almost two decades, the Turkish army lacked the infrastructure and personnel to operate Apaches. The Italian AgustaWestland offered its Mangusta-A129 helicopters, but the Turkish armed forces declined, arguing that the A129’s engine was insufficient to meet its needs (Aksam, March 28, 2008).

    The issue resurfaced several times, but the American side did not change their stance. Diplomatic observers maintained that although shortages were cited as the official justification, Washington refused to sell used Cobras to Turkey to punish Ankara’s inflexibility over the attack helicopter tender. It was also claimed that Turkey’s refusal to send additional troops to Afghanistan was behind Washington’s reluctance to sell the Cobras to Ankara (Today’s Zaman, April 14, 2008; Aksam, March 28, 2008).

    Turkey then reportedly turned to Russia in late 2008. Turkish and Russian media reports claimed that, after being turned down by the United States, Ankara planned to procure 32 MI-28 Night Hunters, an all-weather day-night attack helicopter, in a deal worth $1 billion. However, Russian defense officials denied these claims and said that Turkey did not officially submit such a request (Cihan Haber Ajansi, December 22, 2008).

    Nonetheless, Turkish interest in pursuing the Russian option has continued, reportedly negotiating the purchase of at least 12 MI-28 choppers (Taraf, June 10). Russian defense industry officials attending the IDEF 2009 arms fair in Istanbul in late April maintained that Turkey showed interest in buying Russian air defense systems and combat helicopters (RIA Novosti, April 27). According to recent reports, a delegation from the Turkish defense ministry traveled to Moscow in order to explore the possible acquisition of between 12 and 32 helicopters within the next two or three years (RIA Novosti, June 15).

    In response to a question about the visit of a Turkish delegation to Moscow, Bayar told reporters “I am very hopeful about the purchase of Cobra W class [AH-1W-Supercobra] helicopters… I believe we will acquire them. The U.S. navy is considering the acquisition of the Z series, and they will not need the Cobra W class.” He added that during his visit to the United States, the Turkish Chief of the General Staff General Ilker Basbug also raised this issue with his American counterparts (Radikal, June 14).

    Given the feasibility concerns, the Turkish government is likely to reach a decision after comparing the Russian and American platforms. In addition to technical and economic factors, political considerations will also play a key role in Ankara’s decision. Given the recent rapprochement between Turkey and the United States, it might indeed acquire the Cobras as a temporary measure. Turkish plans to make a greater contribution to Afghanistan following Basbug and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu’s contacts (EDM, June 16) might help remove the objections of the U.S. army to Turkey’s requests.

    Nonetheless, these developments demonstrate how Ankara treads carefully between Moscow and Washington to maximize its leverage. In line with its recent foreign policy orientation, Turkey also appears equally determined to keep its options open in its defense procurement policies.

    https://jamestown.org/program/turkey-considers-procuring-american-or-russian-attack-helicopters/
  • Turkey to buy Russian Night Hunters

    Turkey to buy Russian Night Hunters

    16:02 15/06/2009

    MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik) – A Turkish military delegation has come to Russia to discuss the possible acquisition of Mi-28 attack helicopters. This is not the first time the two countries have discussed cooperation.

    In the 1970s and the early 1980s, Turkey bought 32 used AH-1P/S Cobra attack helicopters in the United States and later upgraded them to the AH-1F specifications. The Turkish army still has 23 AH-1P/S Cobras. However, Turkish military authorities started thinking about replacing them in the mid-1990s.

    During the subsequent tender they considered several models of combat helicopter, including the Ka-50-2 Erdogan, a version of the Russian Ka-50 Black Shark developed by Russia and Israel for Turkey. Unlike the Ka-50 where the pilots sit side-by-side, the seats in the Erdogan are placed in tandem as in the U.S. Cobra chopper.

    However, Turkey did not choose the Kamov helicopter for political reasons, such as growing U.S. influence in Turkey and, conversely, the lack of Russian influence. Also, Russia could not then guarantee the timely production of the required number of new helicopters or post-sale service. Lastly, the Ka-50 was not mass-produced even for the Russian army at that time.

    An updated Cobra with new weapons and equipment was the most probable winner in the Turkish tender, but the contract was eventually awarded to a European producer, the Anglo-Italian AgustaWestland, which proudly proclaims to be “a total rotorcraft capability provider.”

    AgustaWestland, announced as the winning bidder in March 2007, pledged to assemble 50 T129 prototypes in Turkey. However, the first T129 will be rolled out only in 2015, whereas Turkey needs choppers now to fight Kurdish militants.

    The purchase of seven used AH-1W SuperCobras in 2008 has not solved the problem either. Turkey needs modern attack helicopters to fill the gap until 2015 and for several more years while its pilots learn to fly the T129 choppers.

    As a result, Turkey has decided to purchase Russian machines. It has opted for the Mi-28N Night Hunter, which, unlike the Ka-50, has been mass-produced since the 1990s and is supplied to the Russian Armed Forces.

    Turkey may buy between 12 and 32 helicopters within two or three years. It is unclear if it wants the choppers with or without top-mounted radar, which is an extremely expensive option.

    The Turkish military had once considered buying the Mi-24 Crocodile, which has several common structural elements with the Mi-28. The Mi-17 multirole helicopter is currently used in Turkey for military, police and civilian purposes.

    Significantly, the Mil helicopters have for years been used in similar terrain in the Caucasus, Central Asia and the Middle East. Moreover, Russia’s influence and relations with Turkey have grown dramatically and many contradictions in bilateral ties have been smoothed over since the 1990s.

    Therefore, Turkey could buy the Mi-28, whose track record over the past 20 years and the initial results of its combat use show that this highly versatile helicopter could remain on combat duty even after T129 assembly start-up in Turkey.

    And the final touch: the protection and combat payload specifications of the T129 are below those of the Mi-28.

    The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

  • Tatar activist against the policy of Russification

    Tatar activist against the policy of Russification

    Vienna, June 12 – A Tatar activist recently given an 18-month suspended sentence for articles protesting Moscow’s Russification policies, says that the Internet activists may have kept him out of jail and, given the government’s increasing pressure on other media, they are often a last line of defense for the rights of ethnic and religious minorities in that country.
    In an interview given to an independent Tatar journalist, Rafis Kashapov, a leader of the All-Tatar Social Center (VTOTs), explained that he has simply tried through his articles to attract the attention of society and the government to problems others have said less about (www.rupor.info/analitika/2009/06/09/lidera-oppozicii-v-tatarstane-osudili-k-lisheniju-/).
    Among the issues he has raised are “the policy of Russification of national minorities, the restriction of the rights of Muslims, the deportation of peoples, fascism, corruption, drug abuse, alcoholism, depravity, and other social problems” that he believes can only be addressed by open and honest discussion.
    If Russia were a normal democratic state, he suggested, “the leadership of the country would react positively” and seek a resolution of them. But in Russia, “instead of that, [the powers that be] opened a criminal case against” him, charging Kashapov with promoting extremism.
    While the authorities have been angered by Kashapov for a long time, the last straw appears to have been his essay “Say No to Christianization!” posted online earlier this year in which he protested the actions of officials who allowed an Orthodox priest to baptize Tatar babies without the permission of their parents.
    Addressing that issue in particular, Kashapov noted that the authorities had not taken the obvious step of inviting Christian and Muslim leaders to meet with them in order to overcome the problems these baptisms created and that, once they opened a case against him, prosecutors never questioned either the priest who baptized the children or the official who permitted it.
    Unfortunately, however, the Russian government had no interest in finding the truth or even in examining his case more or less honestly, the Tatar leader said. Not only were two FSB agents present at every hearing, an indication of the political sensitivities of the case, but the judge routinely ignored protests by his lawyers.
    Kashapov suggested that “the Internet possibly played a large role” in keeping him out of jail. Not only did he and his supporters place information about the case online when they had no other way of getting past the government’s information blockade, but “the majority” of those who read these materials “understood on whose side the truth is.”
    Moreover, many of those who learned about his case, Kashapov continued, supported him in court, signed appeals, and organized demonstrations and protests on his behalf. And he used this interview to “express gratitude” to these individuals and also to the administrators of the sites of the independent information agencies.”
    Kashapov said that their efforts were especially important because “at the present time in Russia is being conducted an unwritten nationality policy based on force over non-Russian peoples which precludes their free development, subjects them to humiliation and Russification and takes away their spiritual and material wealth.”
    In Tatarstan, this policy involves the ban on the use of the Latin script, the closure of Tatar schools, and the problem of opening replacement in the Tatar language. And as is the case with many other national minorities, it involves Moscow’s decision to reduce to almost nothing the “national-regional component” in the curriculum of the public schools.
    Those legitimate concerns are exacerbated, he said, by the Russian government’s flagrant ignoring of extremist behavior by Russian nationalist groups, like Spartak football fans who displayed pro-Hitler banners at a Kazan match, and by the Russian Orthodox Church, which is trying to baptize or convert the historically Islamic Tatars.
    Individuals and groups in Tatarstan who have tried to expose and oppose such things, Kashapov said, have suffered. Indeed, he said, they like those elsewhere who share their commitment to freedom and national rights increasingly find themselves in a situation that is “difficult and dangerous.”
    But he added, neither he nor they have any choice but to proceed: “Every time, when we multiply a lie, speak an untruth, or commit wrong actions, then by so doing we recognize and support the authoritarian powers that be of Russia, we work for it, and that means we strengthen it.”
    And he added, “playing at democracy in Putin’s Russia has come to an end. It turns out that now the most reliable means [for the government] to resolve a problem is to ‘bury’ an individual just as in Stalin’s time.” According to the calculations of Moscow’s leadership once again, “where there is no person, there is no problem.”
    Kashapov said that he has been physically threatened for his activities and that his family and friends had told him that “it would be better if [he] went abroad,” lest the powers that be “put [him] away in jail or still worse kill [him].” But he told his interlocutor, he has no plans to do so, preferring instead to continue his work in and for Tatarstan.
    His lawyers have filed an appeal which is scheduled to be heard by the republic supreme court, but Kashapov does not expect to win in any Russian venue, given the politics of his situation. Instead, he — like so many other opponents of the regime — is already looking to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg for legal vindication.

    http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/2009/06/window-on-eurasia-internet-last-line-of.html

  • Moderate Islam of Tatarstan Can Be ‘Exported,’ Moscow Scholar Says

    Moderate Islam of Tatarstan Can Be ‘Exported,’ Moscow Scholar Says

    Paul Goble

    Vienna, June 1 – While some Western analysts argue that it is nearly impossible to “export” moderate Islam to other segments of the Muslim community, an increasing number of scholars have begun to focus on those parts of the Muslim world where “moderate” Islam is practiced and where leaders are interested in the spread of this trend.
    Most have focused on Malaysia with its concept of “Islam hadari,” but Ruslan Kurbanov, a senior researcher at Moscow’s Institute of Oriental Studies who earlier worked at the RAND Corporation, argues in a new article posted online this week that the moderate Islam of Tatarstan could prove to be an equally successful “export” (www.islam.ru/pressclub/tema/exportumer/).
    No one should be surprised by this, Kurbanov says, given the commonalities between the two: Both Tatarstan and Malysia “are today among the leaders not only in the economic modernization of traditional Muslim societies but also examples of the achievement by Muslim peoples of high levels of education and integration in a broader and more developed region.”
    The Tatars and the Malaysians are also, he continues, “examples of the most successful models of the combination of traditional Islamic values with the demands of the contemporary world and of the promotion [in their respective societies] of the ideas of moderation, tolerance and openness to the external world.”
    Moreover, both peoples, Kurbanov notes, “came to Islam by a peaceful path in the course of the adoption of the new faith by an aristocratic hierarchy and the soviet Islamization [of the remainder of their societies] ‘from above.’” And both have lived for many centuries in close proximity to “major non-Muslim communities.”
    Not surprisingly, the Muslim leaders of these two societies and in their wake the political leaders of them as well have begun to talk about the kind of Islam their peoples profess as a model for others, even to the point of suggesting this in speeches delivered in Saudi Arabia, the country where Islam began.
    Because Malaysia is an independent country, its political leaders have had a greater opportunity than have those in Tatarstan to promote their ideas more internationally, with that country’s prime minister, Najib Razaq, even telling senior US State Department officials that Malaysian Islam represents “a model” for all other a Muslims.
    But Tatarstan’s version of moderate Islam, Kurbanov insists, deserves attention too as a possible “export commodity” both within the Russian Federation and CIS and more generally, all the more so since an increasing number of Tatar Muslim leaders and political ones as well have been pushing that idea.
    In March of this year, he notes, the Muslim Spiritual Directorate (MSD) of Tatarstan held a roundtable on “The Export of Russian Islam,” a meeting which Kurbanov regrets “did not attract a great deal of attention from the media, although some of the presentations there are beginning to spread through the expert community (www.islamtat.ru/publ/61-1-0-555).
    One reason that this session did not attract more attention at the time, the Moscow scholar suggests, is that Russia’s Muslim leaders have insisted for decades that “traditional” Russian Islam is by its very nature “moderate.” Consequently, many observers likely assumed that the meeting in Kazan did not represent an innovation.
    But, Kurbanov insists, what makes this meeting and the intellectual ferment that produced it something new and important to attend to is that “until recently practically no one advanced the idea that the traditional Russian version of Islam could and should be exported to the rest of the world.”
    The March meeting proposed precisely that, with Rustam Batyr, the deputy head of the Council of the Ulema of the MSD of Tatarstan, saying that “our obligation is to show the entire world just what Russian Islam is and what solutions it offers” to the problems which face the worldwide umma.
    Indeed, Batyr continued, “in our republic has already long been found a model of peaceful cooperation [with people of other faiths] and therefore now, Tatarstan is one of the centers where the future of humanity is being decided,” even if many people elsewhere are not yet aware of that reality.
    According to Kurbanov, the Tatars believe that a major “channel” for exporting their version of Islam consists of the works of the brilliant pleiade of Muslim theologians who formed what is sometimes called the Jadid movement at the end of the tsarist period. But those who seek to promote these writers are limited by the small print runs of their works.
    If that changes or if a new intellectual renaissance begins in Tatarstan, Kurbanov suggests, then the impact of moderate Tatar Islam on the Muslims of the world could quickly become far great than many expect, a development that could justify Batyr’s contention that Kazan is where “the future of humanity” is in fact being decided.

    http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/2009/06/window-on-eurasia-moderate-islam-of.html

  • Traditional Tatar Holiday Marked In Kazakh City

    Traditional Tatar Holiday Marked In Kazakh City

    SEMEY, Kazakhstan — The traditional Tatar holiday of Sabantuy was celebrated in the northeastern Kazakh city of Semey (formerly Semipalatinsk) on June 1, RFE/RL’s Kazakh Service reported.

    Sabantuy traditionally is celebrated by Tatar farmers to mark the end of the spring farming season.

    Semey has a large ethnic-Tatar population.

    Russian Ambassador to Kazakhstan Mikhail Bocharnikov, Executive Committee Chairman of the World Tatar Congress Rinat Zakirov, Tatarstan’s representative in Kazakhstan Ildus Tarkhanov, Tatar Cultural Center Chairman in Xinjiang, China, Ayzel Malik, and Tatar diaspora representatives from many Kazakh and Russian cities took part in the festivities.

    The holiday comes in the wake of the 10th International Festival of Tatar Culture and the conference “Turko-Tatars in the Modern World: Past, Present, and Further Development” held in Semey last week.

    https://www.rferl.org/a/Traditional_Tatar_Holiday_Marked_In_Kazakh_City/1744413.html
  • Russia-Georgia Tensions Harm Armenia

    Russia-Georgia Tensions Harm Armenia

    Continued closure of Russian-Georgian border crossing leaves Armenia cut off from its most important market.

    By Naira Melkumian in Yerevan (CRS No. 495, 29-May-09)

    The Armenian economy, already reeling from the global financial crisis, has suffered a new blow from Georgia’s refusal to re-open a frontier crossing with Russia – Armenia’s only link with its major ally.

    The Upper Lars border post, where the road between Tbilisi and Vladikavkaz crosses the central Caucasus, was closed unexpectedly by Russia in 2006, a major setback to Armenian exporters.

    Now, Russia has re-opened its side of the frontier but Georgia has declined to allow goods to pass through. Georgia, which fought a brief war with Russia last year, says it wants Swiss mediation before it will trust its northern neighbour.

    That leaves Armenia, which currently has to use a lengthy export route via Bulgaria to reach Russia, cut off from its most important market.

    “We are desperately keen that this road should operate. Russia has assured us that on its side all work has been completed. They gave a high priority to Upper Lars functioning, especially since they have provided the customs points with all modern facilities,” said Armenian prime minister Tigran Sarksian.

    The complex geopolitics of the South Caucasus leave Armenia uniquely dependent on this crossing point. The rest of the Georgian border with Russia is closed, either being too mountainous, or controlled by Abkhazia or South Ossetia, which have had their independence recognised by Russia but not by Georgia.

    Armenia and Azerbaijan meanwhile, have not signed a formal treaty to end their war over the breakaway region of Karabakh, leaving the other half of Russia’s southern border closed to Armenian exporters. At the same time, Armenia lacks diplomatic ties with its other main neighbour Turkey, although relations are thawing and may prove a way out of the impasse.

    “Now the question is one of a political decision, and the problem is Russian-Georgian relations. I hope that soon relations between Georgia and Russian normalise and thaw, which will be good for all countries in the region,” said Armenian transport and communications minister Gurgen Sarksian.

    The Russians blame the Georgians for the crossing point being closed, but the Georgians say they cannot trust the Russians to behave honourably.

    “All negotiations in connection with the opening of the crossing point must take place in the presence of the Swiss, in as far as we cannot rule out provocations from the Russians,” said Georgian foreign minister Grigol Vashadze.

    That position, and the inevitable delays that will accompany it, is not likely to please Armenia, which has already seen its economy slump disastrously this year and has had to call on funding from the International Monetary Fund. The country’s central bank has predicted the economy will contract by 5.8 per cent this year, following a 6.1 per cent decline in the first quarter.

    The mining sector has been particularly hard-hit, and several companies have been forced to shed labourers.

    The stand-off has reminded Armenians that their country’s economy is too dependent on Georgia for its own good. Only in August last year, when the war interrupted Armenia’s export trade, the country lost 600-700 million US dollars.

    At the moment, 70-80 per cent of Armenian exports travel to Russia, leaving the Georgian port of Poti for Bulgaria, then shipped to Novorossiisk on Russia’s southern coast. The whole journey can take eight or ten days, whereas the road through the mountains and Upper Lars is relatively quick.

    “If for a long time our goods go only via ship from Poti, then it will create financial problems, increase the cost of our exports, and if you add the economic crisis to this, then you create a situation that is disadvantageous to Armenia,” said Vardan Aivazian, head of the economic committee of the Armenian parliament.

    The stand-off has also added impetus to talks to open the Armenian border with Turkey. The two countries lack diplomatic relations, and have major differences over whether the Ottoman Empire’s slaughter of Armenians in the First World War constituted genocide, but the two sides agreed a so-called road map last month which could kick-start a normalisation of relations.

    Turkish-Armenian unofficial trade via Georgia almost doubled in 2008 to 270 million dollars, although almost all of this consisted of Turkish textiles, building materials and domestic goods. If the border was opened, these goods could travel directly into Armenia.

    “The opening of the border would legalise the trade, which currently goes on between the two countries via Georgia, and would reduce the high transit fees. Currently, Turkish goods are widely used in Armenia, including foodstuffs and products of light industry,” said Aivazian.

    However, the idea of opening the border between Armenia and Turkey has serious opponents, particularly the nationalist Armenian party Dashnaktsutiun, which fears Turkey could dump its products in Armenia and swamp domestic producers.

    “We have studied the economic policies of Turkey and Armenia, and the protectionist policies which Turkey conducts in defence of its own producers clearly bear witness to the fact that we, with our liberal policy, will not benefit from this,” said Ara Nranian, a member of parliament from the party.

    Naira Melkumian is a freelance journalist.