In the report, which was completed in quite a short time as a result of the interviews made with various agencies and organizations and analyses of national and international publications in the field, Turkey’s military and civic helicopter inventory was created and user-based numbers, models and ages of the helicopters were identified. Surveys were made regarding the needs of Turkish users, and the class and specific design features of the helicopter is preferred were identified.

Furthermore, in the report that takes a detailed look at the trends in world markets and the industry, it was assessed that a double-engine light/mid class general-purpose helicopter would be a good choice for starting helicopter

In the comprehensive report, procurement methods were examined, and “national development”, “co-development with a foreign partner”, “licensed production and system integration rights” and “comparison of direct purchase methods” were analyzed, and it was pointed out that except for the national development option, the national industry will not have the necessary knowledge and experience for any of the other methods. It was expressed that in case the national development option is considered, the design infrastructure will be more critical compared to the production infrastructure.

In the report prepared by field experts of STM, the gaps of the Turkish helicopter Industry were identified and it was stated that the priority areas for improvement are the helicopter powertrain, rotor roots and impellers and hydraulic systems.

In the report, the current situation of Turkey’s helicopter industry infrastructure in terms of production and design capabilities was identified, using as a reference the information requested from national companies on the basis of a refractive tree for helicopters. It was emphasized that reaching the target of building an Indigenous Helicopter will be possible if all works are controlled from a single point and if with a realistic planning the facilities of the Turkish Defence Industry are used with some additional investments in deficient areas.

The report also includes a time schedule and a human resources plan and distribution of roles for Turkish Indigenous Helicopter.

STM has prepared a lot of Feasibility and Strategy Documents in many areas in the past for the Undersecretariat for Defence Industries. Identifying hi-tech  platforms/systems/devices fitting the national concept/strategies for the defence requirements of the Turkish Armed Forces and offering solutions to increase national contribution or all-national production is a part of the mission undertaken by STM. that may be seen as the initial target in case design and production of an indigenous design and production activities in Turkey and also for potential markets.

Most likely, Prime Minister George Papandreou is contemplating further increasing taxes, which is the easy solution for any government.

We think that instead he should be doing something else more effective that would be appreciated by the Greek people. That something else would be to cancel the 4.2 billion-euro deal for the purchase of six frigates from France. The cancellation of another submarine purchase agreement with Germany would mean even greater savings for Greece. But unfortunately we feel that the socialist government of Greece will prefer to tax its citizens more rather than having the guts to cancel these armaments purchases. We also believe that the initiative to cancel these agreements could also come from France and Germany, since they seem so interested in saving the eurozone, that their governments have become ridiculous with their public statements in that sense.

Allow us now to quote from an American history school book on what it says on the reasons of the French Revolution. “… Under the French political system, only the working people paid taxes. Nobles and clergy paid hardly anything. Thus the poorest people carried the heaviest tax burden. As France’s debt increased, the French government increased taxes even more.” Now if we replace the word French with Greek, we have an accurate description of the situation of Greece. We truly hope that the Greek government might just remember its history and avoid taking measures that may make the social situation of the country deteriorate.

The reactions of the Greeks are also interesting. They now believe the present Greek government has become irrelevant. Nobody in Greece seems to care anymore on what measures are being taken to reduce the budget deficit, since they all know that there is no follow-up to any measure adopted by the Greek parliament to combat the crisis. Greeks have already started to barter their goods, introduce regional alternative currencies and to proceed by themselves to effectively combat the financial crisis while living in a respectable way. In other words they are ignoring the government. But being ignored by one’s people is the biggest humiliation for any government on this planet. But if the Athens government starts caring for its people, by adopting measures that may hurt other members of the eurozone, but not the Greek people, then it may once again become relevant and may be able to play an important role in the economic restructuring of the country.

Ponder our thoughts, dear humans, for your benefit.

Advena Avis

Turkey has to spend more for several reasons, one of them being they still have a large military. There are 400,000 active-duty personnel and 200,000 reservists. There is also a paramilitary national police force of 180,000 personnel and 50,000 reservists. This force has some armored vehicles and helicopters.

But even at the end of the Cold War, many of their weapons and much of their equipment was old, and a lot of the current and future spending is for buying replacement gear. This includes a new tank (based on a South Korean design) built in Turkey. Then there are the new F-35 stealth aircraft, up to a hundred of them. There are also upgrades for 200 older F-16s. Warships need to be replaced or upgraded. 

The Turks are not doing all this to invade anyone. They have no intention of restoring the old Ottoman Empire (that dissolved in 1918), but they do need a large force to survive in what is a rough neighborhood. Their Arab neighbors (Syria and Iraq) are violent and unpredictable. But the Arabs also fear the Turks, and the Turks feel safer by keeping it that way. Iran is an ancient enemy. Their Christian neighbors (Georgia, Armenia, Bulgaria and Greece) are easier to get along with, except for the Greeks. Most of Turkey’s neighbors are also building up their armed forces, usually (except in the case of Greece) for reasons that have little or nothing to do with Turkey.

Until the end of the Cold War, the Turkish armed forces were responsible for defending NATOs southern flank. But Turkey has not been at war since the 1920s. There have been some minor skirmishes with the Greeks, and two decades of irregular war with their Kurdish minority. There has also been some peacekeeping, and participation in the Korean War (with a brigade). The Turks made a reputation for themselves in Korea, and their campaigns against the Kurdish rebels has shown that Turkish troops are still very effective. The Turks see that warrior reputation as their most powerful defense, but modern weapons make it even more convincing.

The most worrisome recent development in Turkey is the return of religion. An Islamic party, dedicated to honest government and more religion in general, has been running the country for most of the last decade. The Turkish ruling class largely discarded Islam as a factor in government, and public life, in the 1920s and 30s. But most Turks clung to ancient religious, and cultural traditions. The continued corruption in the government, and in society in general, was not only a drag on economic progress, but also immensely unpopular. What is uncertain is whether the use of religion to battle moral deficiencies will have ugly side effects.

StrategyPage

Edward Nalbandian, Armenian Foreign Minister

Armenia’s Foreign Ministry has warned Azerbaijan against trying to push a fresh resolution accusing Yerevan of occupying Azerbaijani lands through the United Nations General Assembly, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, or RFE/RL, reported Thursday on its website.

The ministry said such a move would hamper a peaceful resolution to the Nagorno Karabakh issue.

The draft resolution, which the General Assembly is expected to discuss on Sept. 9, upholds the right of Azerbaijanis “expelled” from Karabakh and the Armenian-controlled territories surrounding it to return to their homes. It also urges the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, or OSCE, to send a fact-finding mission to the conflict zone to investigate the conflict parties’ compliance with “international humanitarian law.”

Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesman Tigran Balayan said the document, if adopted, would cause “serious damage” to international efforts to end the Nagorno Karabakh dispute. Armenian diplomats are now trying to prevent its passage, Balayan said, adding that Yerevan continues to believe that no international bodies except the OSCE Minsk Group should be involved in the search for a solution to the conflict.

“There is no way it won’t pass,” predicted Aleksandr Arzumanian, an opposition leader who headed the Armenian mission at the UN in the early 1990s. “The General Assembly statutes are such that even if five countries vote for and all others abstain, a resolution is deemed adopted. In such cases, most countries usually abstain.”

The 24-year extension will allow the base’s fighter jets and thousands of troops to operate outside former Soviet territory, lifting a previous restriction. The agreement could raise tensions between Armenia and neighboring Azerbaijan, who have clashed over Nagorno-Karabakh.

“The protocol doesn’t just allow the Russian military base to stay in Armenia for a longer period, it also extends the sphere of its geographic and strategic responsibility,” Armenian President Serge Sarkisian said after talks with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

The deal is part of Moscow’s efforts to strengthen its clout in ex-Soviet nations, which have worried many of its neighbors. Russia fought a brief August 2008 war with Georgia, which borders Armenia to the north, and tensions have remained high. “Russia wants to underline its role as the key player in the region,” said Sergei Minasian, a Yerevan-based political expert.

Russia’s clout on former Soviet turf, which Russian leaders have declared a privileged zone of interests, has remained limited, however. Moscow has run into fierce economic and political disputes with its one-time closest ally, Belarus. Russian and Belarusian leaders have traded barbs and blamed one another for an increasing strain in relations.

Russia also has talked much about raising its influence in Central Asia and has grown increasingly jealous of the U.S. presence there, but it did nothing when the government of Kyrgyzstan asked Moscow to send troops to help put down deadly ethnic violence in June.

After their talks, the Russian and Armenian presidents were joined by other leaders from a Moscow-led security alliance of seven ex-Soviet nations. Medvedev said the Kyrgyzstan unrest showed that the Collective Security Treaty Organization needed to be able to respond more quickly and effectively in crisis situations. He said the treater organization leaders agreed to form a plan by the end of the year, and he recommended studying the experience of other organizations such as NATO, the EU and United Nations.

Armenia on Friday also awarded Russia with a contract to build two new reactors at a Soviet-era nuclear power plant. Construction works on the $5 billion project are expected to start next year.

Russia has maintained close ties with Armenia since the Soviet collapse, providing economic assistance to the landlocked nation, whose economy has been crippled by blockades by Azerbaijan and Turkey over the Nagorno-Karabakh issue.

Nagorno-Karabakh is an enclave in Azerbaijan that has been occupied by Armenian forces since the end of a six-year conflict that left about 30,000 people dead and displaced 1 million prior to a 1994 truce.

Russian already provides a security guarantee to Armenia under the CSTO, and it was not clear how the new guarantee would be different. Russia’s base in Armenia has about 5,000 troops along with MiG-29 fighter jets and S-300 air defense missiles, according to Russian and Armenian reports citing official sources.

Medvedev said the base is intended to “support peace and stability in the southern Caucasus and the entire Caucasus region.” Nagorno-Karabakh has been under the control of ethnic Armenian forces since a six-year conflict ended with a 1994 truce.

Azerbaijan has often voiced concern about Russian military cooperation with Armenia. Russia is taking part in mediation efforts on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue along with the United States and France under the auspices of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, but attempts to reach a settlement have failed and sporadic clashes have continued in a tense zone around the region. “We have neither peace, nor war,” Sarkisian said Friday. “It’s bad that there is no peace, but at least there is no war.”

U.S. Congress

Turkish officials have asked the United States administration to increase its pressure on Congress to approve a pending arms sale to Turkey, which needs arms in the fight against terror, according to diplomatic sources.

“We have realized that we should inform members of Congress better on Turkey and current issues. To this end, we will send delegations to the U.S. Congress after Congress elections in November,” a source said.

The message was given to U.S. officials by the Turkish diplomatic delegation headed by Undersecretary Feridun Sinirlioğlu that visited Washington this week. The delegation held talks with senior State Department officials William Burns and James Steinberg, American-Turkish Council head Richard Armitage and representatives of the pro-Israeli lobby in the United States.

According to reports, the U.S. Congress suspended the process of important arms sales to Turkey following the country’s no vote at the United Nations Security Council over imposing a new round of sanctions on Iran. A number of Congressmen later signed a joint statement urging the administration to review its state of alliance with Turkey.

The Turkish delegation realized that some members of Congress had little information about the content of the Tehran Declaration and how the process was brokered with the approval of the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, including the U.S.

“Turkey’s objective was and is not to defend Iran but to solve the problem through diplomacy,” the delegation told their counterparts.

Regarding the sanctions to be imposed on Iran, the Turkish delegation repeated its commitment to the U.N. resolution and said it would implement it. However, the Turkish diplomats underlined the close ties between Turkey and Iran and made it clear that Washington’s unilateral sanctions would not be endorsed by Turkey.

On cooperation for the eradication of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, the U.S. has voiced its decision to continue to work with Turkey. Turkish diplomats emphasized the need to intensify U.S. efforts to cut the financial activities of the PKK, especially in Europe.

The organization is listed as a terrorist group by Turkey, the U.S. and the European Union.

The appointment process of Francis Ricciardone as the top U.S. envoy to Turkey was also on the delegation’s agenda.

“The absence of an American ambassador is a serious matter,” said a Turkish diplomat.

U.S. officials said they were expecting that the appointment process would be completed in early September but were avoiding making concrete statements.

Turkey’s relations with Israel and the suspended reconciliation process with Armenia were also discussed in Washington. Having noted that Turkey would not stop asking for an apology and compensation from Israel for the May 31 flotilla attack, the Turkish diplomats also expressed their desire to normalize ties with Israel.

Arguing that the reconciliation process with Armenia had been suspended due to internal political problems in that country, the Turkish diplomats asked the U.S. to intervene to revitalize the process.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu began a three-day trip to Greece on Aug. 16 to hold talks with Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou. Netanyahu’s visit is the first by an Israeli prime minister and comes shortly after a July 23 visit to Israel by Papandreou, during which the two vowed to boost bilateral ties. That trip was also significant as the first time in 18 years that a Greek prime minister visited Israel.

Both sets of talks come amid a deterioration in Turkish-Israeli relations that began with the 2008 Israeli military intervention in the Gaza Strip, ending Turkish-mediated peace talks between Israel and Syria. This decline was exacerbated with the death of nine Turkish nationals during a May 31 Israel Defense Forces raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla organized by a Turkish NGO. While there have been efforts to mend ties since then, Israel has, for the most part, adopted a strategy of diverting Turkey’s attention from its efforts to emerge as a Middle Eastern power.

Under this strategy, Greece is a perfect tool for Israel. Turkey has long been Greece’s main rival, and the two have long maintained a balance of power in the Aegean Sea, their main point of contention. Controlling the Aegean is crucial for Greece to exert sovereignty over its mainland and thousands of islands. But maintaining this control means Greece has had to build up one of the most advanced air forces on the Continent, a costly affair for a country with a population of just 10 million even when not facing a massive sovereign debt crisis. This, plus Turkey’s new push in the Middle East, have made Athens much less of a threat to Ankara. Greece has attempted to reduce tensions with Turkey, offering a controlled drawdown of forces in the Aegean, but Ankara largely rebuffed this gesture both because it considers Greece less of a threat and because Turkey, looking to expand its influence in the Caucasus, Balkans and Middle East, needs to maintain its military deterrence and cannot afford a drawdown.

Israel and Greece see benefits in increasing ties as a means of throwing Turkey off balance. Israel is hoping Turkey will be concerned about an assertive Greece on its western border, while Greece wants to show Turkey it has options to maintain the balance in the Aegean. This is a change in political reality; Greece was a vociferously pro-Arab state throughout the Cold War, with many Palestine Liberation Organization members finding refuge in Athens. Greece opposed Israel because it was suspicious of the Turkish-Israeli alliance and because it did not want to find itself isolated from Arab energy exports during the Cold War. But with the weakening Turkish-Israeli alliance — for decades a key to the Middle Eastern balance of power — Athens sees a chance to send a message to Ankara. Reports alleging that Greece will allow Israeli jet fighters to use its airspace for training — something Turkey previously had provided — could be just such a message.

However, from the Israeli perspective, an alliance with Greece is hardly a substitute for one with Turkey. Greece has no influence in the Middle East other than through its EU membership and a history of diplomatic support for Arab states. Cooperation with Greece will have no impact on Israel’s overall stance in the Middle East because Greece has no influence in the region. This is not the case with Turkey. Turkey, as an ally, would be an asset for Israel. Moreover, Greek-Israeli military cooperation is not unprecedented. In the summer of 2008, the Israeli air force held a “dress rehearsal” for an Israeli attack on Iran over Greek waters.

These diplomatic moves are little more than a message to Turkey. Israel is prodding Ankara by increasing ties with Athens, and Greece is happy to accept the attention, given its current pressures. But with Israel’s priorities in the Middle East running up against Turkey’s attempts to become a regional power and Greece too weak to pose a credible threat, it will take a lot more than a superficial increase in ties to motivate Ankara to change its current course.

Stratfor

Haris Silajdzic, Bosnian President

The president of Bosnia and Herzegovina has said he finds Turkey’s Balkans policy “very positive” and knows that many in Europe have positive thoughts about Turkey’s new role in the Balkans just days ahead of President Abdullah Gül’s scheduled visit to the Balkan country.

“Three-way meetings [between Bosnia, Serbia and Croatia] are perfect and very successful. Such an initiative had not been set out on until now. Of course not all problems will be solved in these meetings, but a new climate has been formed in every sense among us,” Haris Silajdzic, the chairman of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, said in an interview with the Anatolia news agency while assessing Turkey-led facilitation efforts for reconciliation between the Balkan nations.

Turkey initiated a series of foreign ministerial gatherings among the three countries in October of last year. Thanks to these meetings, Bosnia and Herzegovina announced it will appoint an ambassador to Serbia in February. The next demarche came from Serbia, when the Serbian parliament apologized in late March for the bloody Srebrenica massacre, a move interpreted by some as a giant stride towards reconciliation between the two nations.

Stressing that Turkey’s initiative to revamp strained relations among the Balkan nations will bring about positive results, Silajdzic said this will benefit all sides. “Turkey’s role in this is big. This role is creating a new climate, new relations in a region where all are neighbors. We need to be in better cooperation if we are thinking about the betterment of our societies. Turkey is working in this regard,” the Bosnian leader said.

Gül will pay a two-day visit to Bosnia on Sept. 2-3 to review bilateral ties between the two countries. Silajdzic said Gül’s visit is “very important” and that they will discuss in some detail the problems facing the country.

He also complained that not everyone in Bosnia thinks the way he does with respect to Turkey’s engagement in the Balkans and said “these people still live in the past.”

Milorad Dodik, the prime minister of Republika Srpska, a semi-autonomous Serbian political entity within Bosnia, accused Turkey last week of interfering in Bosnian internal political affairs and of acting in favor of Bosnian Muslims. “We resent the fact that Turkey wants a unified and centralized Bosnia, favoring only one of the peoples [living in the country],” Dodik told Bosnian state radio.

Silajdzic dismissed Dodik’s remarks and said he considers them “farcical.” “There is neither a peaceful nor a military way to divide the country,” he added.

Serbs in Bosnia control 49 percent of Bosnian territory and constantly advocate more autonomy. They adamantly oppose the centralization of the country. Turkey has repeatedly stated its support for Bosnia’s territorial integrity.

The 1992-95 Bosnian conflict left the country split into two semi-independent entities: the Republika Srpska and the Muslim-Croat Federation, each having its own government. They are united by weak central institutions.