Click to see full-size image
Several US security partners have, for a while now, shown interest in procuring the Russian S-400 Triumf missile defense system.
Turkey is the most prominent example, as it has already received both of its shipments of S-400 systems. The first one was completed ahead of schedule in mid-July, while the second one was completed on September 15th. Both S-400 batteries would go active in April 2020, the Turkish defense ministry said.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusglu told an interview with CNN Turk that both systems would be activated, despite the US warnings.
“They (U.S. officials) told us ‘don’t activate them and we can sort this out’, but we told them that we didn’t buy these systems as a prop,” Cavusoglu said.
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan told Reuters he will discuss buying U.S. Patriot missiles with U.S. President Donald Trump this month, saying his personal bond with the U.S. leader could overcome the crisis caused by the S-400s.
Trump and Erdogan are both at the 74th UN General Assembly, but there’s been no reports regarding conversations between the leaders, after they failed to meet.
In response to Turkey’s actions, the US removed it from the F-35 joint strike fighter program, and the US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that sanctions were under consideration.
Other than that, India expressed interest in the S-400 in October 2015. The Indian Defense Acquisition Council was given the greenlight to procure the missile defense system in December of the same year.
Fast forward through some trials and tribulations and in October 2018 a formal deal was signed for the delivery of 5 S-400 batteries for $5.5 billion, with an estimated completed delivery by 2023.
In September 2019, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov said that the first batch of the S-400 would be delivered in March 2021.
The US warned India over purchasing the S-400 and that it would be to the detriment of bilateral relations.
U.S. Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asia Alice Wells said in an official testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on June 13 that the purchase of the S-400 defense systems could limit burgeoning India-U.S. military relations.
Both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are also negotiating on the purchase of S-400 systems, despite also having US F-35 fighter jets.
Both countries, as of latest reports from March 2019 for Qatar and February 2019 for the Kingdom are negotiating with Russia for the missile defense systems.
The US has simply warned that relations would be damaged if the systems were purchased. Turkey was specifically thrown out of the F-35 joint strike fighter program for purchasing the “incompatible” S-400 system. There is yet no conclusive information on whether Qatar and Saudi Arabia would purchase the S-400, thus there is yet no need for a harsher rhetoric from the Trump Administration.
The interest in the S-400, and the more modern Russian missile defense systems is only to increase. After all, on September 14th, numerous missiles and drones made it through several Patriot missile defense systems and heavily damaged Aramco’s oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo played it down, saying that “all missile defense systems sometimes fail,” but the facts are quite showing.
The Patriot defense system’s failure is to the great benefit of the Russian systems, which, so far, appear to be working sufficiently well, judging by the continuous unsuccessful attempts to attack the Hmeimim Air Base in Syria via drones.
Provided is an infographic by the “Foundation for the Defense of Democracies,” outlining the progress each US Security Partner has made in procuring S-400 missile defense systems.
Click to see full-size image
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Well UAE is about to have another epic patriot failure. Better buy Russian prime tech asap.
Leave Yemen or face crippling attacks on your country: Ansarallah to UAE
“U.S. Patriot Defense System’s Failure Makes Russian S-400 Look Even Better”
No sh!t Sherlock.
To be fair, the S-400 saw zero use in a real combat scenario.
S-400 is only a part of an anti-aircraft system; many and many drones attacks were foiled by that system. And in some circumstances Russians showed the radar tracks of US stealth(sic!) aircrafts
Syria isn’t a ‘real combat scenario? In 2015 the US coalition had complete air superiority over Syria. They don’t today. What’s the difference? The IAF used to fly over Syria with impunity and bomb whoever they liked. Today they are limited to taking pot shots from Lebanese airspace. Why’s that?
The USA tried to show it’s dominance by launching 2 massive cruise missile attacks against Syria only to have 75% of their missiles shot down or ‘fail to reach their targets” and the ones that did reach their targets found only empty buildings because these were the only targets undefended.
Does the United States government ever think about, if purchasing Russian weapons and defensive systems by friendly countries would be detrimental for bilateral relations, what would be the effect of America’s threats and sanctions on their friends?
Well, what do I know? Maybe it has no ill effect, maybe it even solidifies their shaking bonds. After all, who doesn’t like to be bullied, threatened and sanctioned? Donald knows best!!
WOOHOOO! Trump 2020!
You’d think that too, that true friendship would create true loyalty. But I reckon that the US leadership has been so used to being the world’s only super power and have its allies cower to them as vassals that they pretty much have forgotten the first part of that famous sentence: Speak softly, but always carry a big stick. Carrying the big stick is all they know these days.
In my opinion the comparison is wrong. Patriot’s problem is that it is supposed to be a jack of all trades. Long range air defense, medium range air defense, short range air defense, missile interception. Whereas the Russians have developed a whole family of systems which together form a good layered system. Long range? S-400. Medium range? S-300 or Buk. Short range? Pantsjir and Tor. Couple with electronic warfare. Russian commanders have options in case one system fails because there is some overlap between systems. American commanders, or this case Saudi commanders, can only chew on the carpet when Patriot fails, because they have nothing else.
In the case of Saudi Arabia I don’t think having S-400 would have saved the day, as defending those refineries would be a job for Pantsjir or Tor.
Or Rheinmetall Oerlikon skyshield as a point defense system, securing the refineries. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwwPgP6iLns https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMDJ0bwn4sE
Did not work in Saudi Arabia.
the Bofors 40 mm is a far better alternative than anything oerlikon can come up with. just so you know!
You are quite right, the Patriot should be compared to Pantsir or Tor and THAAD should be compared to S-300 or S-400.
Yes Barba, i share your remark on comparison. Between “numerous missiles and drones”, patriot should have prevent missiles reaching the target, While for drones another system is needed. So, Saudis can only hope missiles will prematurely fall.
The U.S should throw out it’s whole weapons program, this would save it somewhere in the vicinity of 500 billion. With the other 150 billion it has left from its 650 billion dollar budget, just buy Russian weapons. Makes me laugh how the U.S is talking about developing hypersonic weapons, by the time they get one, they will be obsolete, as Russia will have something far advanced.
It wouldn’t surprise me if the USGOV provoked air attacks on the Latakia Russian base to “show” the failure of the Russian air defense. Bring down others to make yours look less of a failure… The only way the S400 could look as bad as the Partiot is if it started shooting down their own planes… The Patriot has done this…
First priority of any Government is the national security and defence of it’s nation, people and dependent territory. Not to keep the US sweet.
S300 / 400 has not brought down any Israeli planes, the system used to bring down drones in Syria are mostly Pansir system and the drones used by the terrorists in Syria are very basic ones and probably been jammed electronically..
Thank YOU! I have been saying this since day one, only short range missile defence systems has been used by Russia along with Electronic warfare jamming. They haven’t fired S-300 or S-400. The systems have never been used in Syria and are only there to protect Russian aircrafts from enemy aircraft, not against Israeli aircraft. Russia also has forced Syria to not activate the S-300 system. No matter what air defence system it is, it can always be overwhelmed by a drone swarm unless other means are taken to protect the base such as EW. Although I do like the pantsir S-1 very much, the Pantsir S-2 is a class itself.
Patriot defense system and S-300 defense system’s failure’s are what make the S-400 look more appealing. The Patriot system cannot defend against Yemen’s ground-to-ground missiles and… The S-300 system cannot defend against Israels airplanes. Both systems are frauds. So far it is Iran’s Khordad defense systems that have proven themselves against the most high tech military planes on the planet.
Lol the S-300 has not even been deployed nor activated in Syria, which was confirmed by Satellite images released by a private Israeli company. The Patriots failure is normal. No Air defence system is 100% efficient and all can be overwhelmed by swarm of drones. The only reason Russia has been able to defend it’s airbase in Syria against swarm of drones isn’t because of s-400 or S-300 because they don’t use these systems against drones.
It’s thanks to its Pantsir short range systems and electronic warfare. People seem uninformed and assume that the S-300 or the S-400 actually engage in Syria to protect the base but the truth is they haven’t fired a single missile because it would be extremely costly and unnecessary. As I said before, short range missile defence systems engage drones and missile attacks from jihadis in Syria against the Russian base.
You can’t compare the S-300 or S-400 to Patriot because Patriot is short range and S systems are long range. Patriot should be compared to Pantsir and S systems should be compared to Thaad. Or else it would be like comparing a pistol to a sniper.
When I was a kid the US talked a lot about the value of competition. Threatening an ally for wanting a strictly defensive weapon is an excellent reveal. If you go sideways on us you are not allowed to defend yourself.