‘Crete model’ unlikely to work for Turkey’s Russian S-400 missiles

Turkish Defence Minister Hulusi Akar has suggested that Turkey and the U.S. could resolve their differences over his country’s procurement of Russian S-400 air defence missile systems by replicating what he called the “Crete model.” He was directly referring to Greece’s possession of older Russian S-300 missiles that have been based on Crete for years now.
“We’ve seen this before, whatever the model used
for the S-300 on Crete, we’re open to negotiating,” Akar was quoted as saying.
Cyprus originally ordered those
S-300s in the late 1990s to deter Turkish overflights of its airspace. Ankara
threatened to destroy them if they were deployed on the divided island,
sparking a major crisis. That crisis was averted when Greece agreed to take
delivery of the missiles instead, putting them in storage on Crete. Athens did
not activate the systems until a military exercise in 2013.
Akar’s invocation of the Crete
model appears limited to Turkey only activating the S-400s under certain
circumstances rather than removing them from the country.
“It’s not as if we’ll always use them,” Akar
said. “The systems are used according to the state of threats. We will make
decisions based on that.”
Greek S-300s, he added, are “not
always operational.”
The U.S., however, has
consistently and unequivocally dismissed suggestions that it would even settle
for Turkey keeping its S-400s in storage unactivated, never mind deploying them
as a nonintegrated standalone air defence system. Washington has invariably
stressed that Turkey needs to get rid of them altogether.
Consequently, if Ankara is
suggesting a “Crete model” that could satisfy Washington’s demands – and have
U.S. sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act
(CAATSA) imposed on it since December removed – it would need to be a model
whereby the missiles are moved out of country.
One analyst has already suggested
that storing the S-400s in Northern Cyprus might be such an option. That,
incidentally, wasn’t the first time the idea of relocating the S-400s outside
of Turkey was suggested. In June 2020, U.S. Senate Majority Whip John Thune
proposed that Washington could buy the S-400s in order to have them verifiably
removed from Turkey.
The following month, an editorial
in the Turkish state-run Daily Sabah newspaper questioned if deploying Turkish
S-400s in Libya – where the Turkish military has a sizable presence, including
air defences – would be acceptable for the U.S. and Russia.
Analysts consulted by Ahval News
are highly sceptical that the relocation of Turkish S-400s to either Northern
Cyprus or Libya would be acceptable for Washington.
“North Cyprus would be a very unlikely
compromise, given that the U.S. does not recognize the country, and the move
would alarm the Europeans and Greece, and it would necessarily not fall under
compliance for the U.S. NDAA (National Defence Authorization Act), which
demands that Turkey no longer use the S-400, even in a foreign setting,” said
Ryan Bohl, the Middle East and North Africa Analyst for Stratfor, a RANE
company. “To send it to Libya would also violate the UN arms embargo, something
the U.S. would oppose.”
Furthermore, Greece and Cyprus
would both be alarmed by any S-400 deployment in North Cyprus since they would
view it as “a weapons system that could be utilized to further entrench
Turkey’s control of the north.”
Nicholas Heras, Director of
Government Relations at the Institute for the Study of War, also doubts the
relocation of Turkish S-400s to western Libya would be desirable for the U.S.
or NATO since “that would mean the proliferation of advanced Russian weapons
systems in the Mediterranean.”
“Moving the S-400s to Northern Cyprus would be a
clear signal that Turkey is preparing for an eventual armed conflict with
Greece and its allies, which plan to use advanced air assets against Turkey in
the event of a war,” Heras said.
“Ankara put itself in a corner with the S-400
system, especially with the U.S. Congress.”
Purchasing S-400s resulted in
Turkey’s suspension from the fifth-generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program,
its order for those jets cancelled, and the imposition of CAATSA sanctions.
Even if Turkey gets rid of its
S-400s, it could still take time until the U.S. would consider readmitting it
into the F-35 program.
“It’s possible, but would be very slow going,”
Bohl said. “They would essentially be starting the program again from scratch,
and there would be lingering trust issues between the United States and Turkey
that would slow its re-admittance.”
More generally, Heras believes that by proposing the Crete model, Turkey is trying to make “a NATO argument to get to keep its S-400s and remain a candidate to receive the F-35.”
“The problem is that the S-400 systems are far more advanced than the S-300 system, and there remain deep concerns, especially from the U.S., that even a passive S-400 deployment for training purposes could be used by the Russians to gain precious intelligence on the F-35s,” he said. “This situation is seen as a security liability for the U.S. as it orients toward pushing back against Russia.”
George Tzogopoulos, a senior fellow at the Centre International de Formation Européenne and research associate at the Begin Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies (BESA), noted that Akar’s suggestion comes amid the backdrop of the new Biden administration in Washington and a striving on both sides to find “a modus vivendi that will safeguard” mutual U.S.-Turkish interests.
While the S-400 is not the only
issue on their agenda, it’s undoubtedly the “biggest thorn.”
“In its interest to appease American fears,
Ankara employs a public rhetoric that denotes its will to collaborate with
Washington on the matter,” Tzogopoulos said. “But this will arguably exhibit it
might be prepared to accept American terms.”
On the technical level, he
believes there are solutions they can explore to improve the climate of talks
and views Akar’s comment on the matter as “an indication of possible technical
arrangements that might perhaps be discussed from a Turkish perspective.”
However, there is a broader
ongoing problem of trust in the U.S.-Turkey relationship.
“Dialogue continues, but dialogue itself does
not magically restore the missing confidence,” Tzogopoulos said. “Having said
that the U.S. will not alter its approach on the joint F-35 program in the
short and medium-term.”
Also, there is a fundamental
divergence of interests and goals. Whereas Ankara is attempting to strengthen
its position in a new regional order Washington seeks to preserve close
cooperation with other countries in a new world order.
“I would expect a tense Turkish-American
relationship with agreements on some issues and disagreements on others,” he
said. “And Russia will remain a key partner for Turkey irrespective of
Washington’s frustration.”
“This also applies to the potential usage of
S-400.”