WhatsApp_Image_2021-05-01_at_2.42_.07_PM_

Failing to secure a deal with the United States (US) and other NATO countries for an air defense system, Turkey turned to Russia for the S-400 air defense system. In 2017, Turkey signed a deal worth $2.5 billion for the procurement of four batteries of S-400. This deal was not welcomed by the Western world who viewed it as a threat. Tukey was repeatedly asked by US to abandon the deal and opt for its Patriot air defense systems instead since there were serious concerns in Washington that the deployment of S-400 will pose major compatibility issues between the Russian and NATO equipment, particularly the F-35 fighter jets. However, Turkey proceeded with the deal with the justification that S-400 will not be integrated with NATO equipment and will work on an independent network.

On 12 July 2019, Turkey received its first shipment of the S-400 air defense systems and became the first NATO country to acquire this system. Resultantly, Turkey was sanctioned by USA under the Countering American Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) following this procurement. It was also informed that it will be removed from the F-35 fighter jet program despite the fact that it contributed significantly to the development and finance of this initiative. As soon as the first shipment arrived in Turkey, the training of the Turkish pilots operating the F-35 aircraft in US was halted to signal Washington’s severe disapproval of the deal.

The Trump administration warned Turkey of more sanctions if it did not withdraw from the deal. With the change of administration in the US, renewed efforts were once again made to persuade Turkey to give up the deal. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with the Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu at the NATO Summit held in March 2021. S-400 was one of the prime issues discussed between both of them. Secretary Blinken urged that Turkey should withdraw from its deal with Russia, reiterating the compatibility issues of S-400 with NATO equipment. Turkish Foreign Minister informed his counterpart that it was a “done deal” and Turkey had no intention to reverse it. As a result, the US officially notified Turkey that it had been removed from the F-35 consortium agreement on 22 April 2021.

The US State Department has warned of “potentially serious consequences” if Turkey activates the systems. When reports of Turkey testing the S-400 emerged, a Pentagon spokesperson stated “We have been clear: An operational S-400 system is not consistent with Turkey’s commitments as a US and NATO ally. We object to Turkey’s purchase of the system and are deeply concerned with reports that Turkey is bringing it into operation.” Compounding Washington’s problems, Russia is offering more jets to Turkey such as Su-35 and Su-57 fighter aircraft to complement the S-400 air defense system.

Efforts towards easing tensions between the US and Turkey have not borne any meaningful results. In 2019, a technical joint working group was proposed by Turkey to assess the operational use of the Russian air defense system. However, the proposal was turned down by the Americans. Similarly, there were speculations of using the Crete Model after the Turkish Foreign Defense Minister Hulusi Akar stated that Turkey was open to negotiations on the S-400 for a settlement similar to the Crete Model. The model refers to the settlement of a conflict which was ignited after Greece purchased S-300 air defense systems from Russia in 1996. Due to strong opposition from Turkey, these air defense systems were never deployed in Cyprus but were shifted on the small island called Crete in Greece. Resultantly, applying the model in this case implies that Turkey would merely possess the S-400 systems and not activate it, rather keep it at a location on which the US and NATO members have no objection. These speculations were short-lived as the Presidential Spokesperson Ibrahim Kalin denied that such a formula was not on their agenda and Turkey’s position on the S-400 was very clear. It is likely that Russia may have objected to this option.

Turkey is caught between the two major powers, with each side aiming to extend its sphere of influence. The issue still remains unresolved even after two years of the arrival of the S-400 batteries as Ankara has not been able to come up with an option which could satisfy both sides.

Another way to look at this issue is that Turkey is signaling its new geo-political status where it has adopted a policy of non-alignment with either the US or Russia rather it aims to balance both sides. It sees itself as a regional actor which can assert itself independently without clearly siding with any major power. In the future, it could use the defense procurement from Russia as a bargaining chip to get some incentives from Washington. At the same time, it could improve its relations with Russia by cooperation in economic, diplomatic, and military domains.

It is yet to be seen how Turkey tries to ease its tensions with Washington and strengthen its ties with Kremlin. However, one thing is clear that this deal is likely to impact Turkey’s position in the region, its alliances, and the great power competition in the Middle East.

Shaza Arif is a Researcher at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS). The article was first published by Khaleej Mag. She can be reached at [email protected]


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »