New US sanctions target $500m in Turkish defense exports

Short Url
Updated 15 December 2020
Follow

New US sanctions target $500m in Turkish defense exports

  • The new sanctions follow Turkey’s controversial purchase and testing of the Russian S-400 missile system
  • Turkey’s main opposition party CHP also strongly criticized the sanctions, saying the purchase was ‘Turkey’s sovereign decision’

ANKARA: US sanctions on Turkey have angered President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and complicated strained relations between the two countries, experts have said.

The new sanctions follow Turkey’s controversial purchase and testing of the Russian S-400 missile system.

“Despite our warnings, Turkey moved ahead with its purchase and testing of the S-400 system from Russia. Today’s sanctions on Turkey demonstrates the US will fully implement CAATSA. We will not tolerate significant transactions with Russia’s defense sector,” outgoing US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said.

The decision was announced as part of the Countering America’s Adversaries through Sanctions Act. It includes a ban on all US export licenses and authorizations to Turkey’s Presidency of Defense Industries (SSB), as well as asset freezes and visa restrictions on the SSB president and three other employees.

The SSB is also barred from receiving US loans of more than $10 million, banned from receiving support from the US Export-Import Bank, while Washington will also use its clout in international financial institutions to block loans to the agency.

The main objective of the sanctions is to penalize significant transactions with Russia, like the $2.5 billion missile system bought from Rosoboronexport, Russia’s main arms export entity. The system was installed in Turkey and tested in October last year.

Although the US president can remove the sanctions if Turkey abandons the Russian missile system, Ankara has stood by its decision.

Madalina Vicari, an independent geopolitical analyst, said that if the Biden administration decides to move ahead with tougher sanctions, it would be a “political signal” to show that US wants to revamp its relations with Turkey.

“The restrictions over the export licenses are the most severe of all sanctions, but even it could have been worse,” she told Arab News.

Turkey condemned the “unilateral” sanctions, saying it will retaliate at “the right time.”

Turkey’s main opposition party CHP also strongly criticized the sanctions, saying the purchase was “Turkey’s sovereign decision.”

CHP deputy and former ambassador Unal Cevikoz said: “S-400s should be activated as soon as possible.”

Experts have different explanations as to why the US did not select tougher sanctions, such as preventing Turkish access to the SWIFT international banking system.

“Hard sanctions would have heavily impacted Turkey’s economy, which is already facing difficulties, and they would have affected US-Turkey relations for the worse. The goal of the outgoing US administration isn’t to antagonize Turkey, and neither to leave to the future administration a hot potato,” Vicari said.

However, she added that harsh sanctions and the subsequent economic penalty would have been “heavily weaponized” domestically through public rhetoric.

“And that wouldn’t have helped the opposition either, because a crippled economy would take more time to recover. It would have pushed the opposition into the corner. They couldn’t support them too much,” Vicari said.

An hour before Washington announced the sanctions, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan expressed his anger over the decision.

It is the first time that the US has sanctioned a NATO ally in the history of the alliance. The unprecedented decision could also affect European suppliers of the SSB, like major Italian defense companies that could cut cooperation with Ankara because they are also major suppliers to the US.

Turkey expert Matthew Goldman from the Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul said the US sanctions could have been more harsh by taking aim at the fundamentals of the Turkish economy or targeting higher-ups in the Erdogan government.

“The Magnitsky Act was used to sanction Erdogan’s justice and interior ministers in 2018 to secure the release of the imprisoned US preacher Andrew Brunson, which had an immediate impact on the Turkish economy,” he told Arab News.

“With these recent CAATSA sanctions, however, the State Department avoided targeting officials close to Erdogan and presented them with a somewhat conciliatory speech, reminding people that Russia is their real target here, and not Turkey,” Goldman added.

Presidential Communications Director Fahrettin Altun opted for a softer tone in his first public comments following the sanctions. He called for dialogue and emphasized “the strategic partnership between Turkey and the US,” tweeting: “We remain hopeful that the US will reverse this grave mistake without delay.”

According to Goldman, Turkey’s reaction was strong, but “could have been stronger.”

He said: “They promised they will retaliate and expressed indignation that, as a fellow NATO member, they would be treated this way. Still, they also left the door open to dialogue.”

The sanctions will mainly hit Turkey’s defense sector as the US imported $531 million worth of defense goods from Turkey in 2020. The Turkish defense industry is heavily reliant on US-made parts.

Goldman said that Turkey might respond by accelerating efforts to diversify its defense supply chains away from the US, working more closely with Ukraine and other countries, as well as producing more parts locally — a strategic shift that will take time and “has its own limits.”

He said: “Since 2018, the US Congress has already been quietly blocking some defense exports to Turkey for projects like F-16 upgrades, the T129 helicopter and MILGEM warship, which Turkey is trying to sell to Pakistan. Turkey has already responded by developing its own engine for the T129 to replace blocked US engines.”

For the incoming Biden administration, Goldman said that the US Congress — including both Republicans and Democrats members — will preserve its “very anti-Erdogan” as well as “anti-Russian” stance, and will continue to push a hard line against defense sales to Turkey.


ADNOC shipping rules out quick return to Red Sea, CEO says

Updated 24 January 2025
Follow

ADNOC shipping rules out quick return to Red Sea, CEO says

  • Danish shipping company Maersk said on Friday it would continue to reroute around Africa via the Cape of Good Hope until safe passage through the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden area was ensured for the longer term

DUBAI: Red Sea shipping remains risky despite the Gaza ceasefire and an announcement by Houthis to limit attacks, according to the CEO of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company’s logistics and shipping arm.
Shipping executives remain cautious about a return to the Red Sea, given the risk to seafarers, cargo, and their assets.
Houthis have carried out more than 100 attacks on ships since November 2023, resulting in most shipping companies diverting vessels away from the Suez Canal to use the longer route around southern Africa instead.
“As we speak today, we cannot say it’s almost completely gone, and it’s a go-ahead for all the fleet to go inside the Red Sea. As I said, there is a people side to it, so we cannot risk our people going there while there may be a fragile ceasefire now,” said ADNOC Logistics & Services CEO Abdulkareem Al-Masabi.
Danish shipping company Maersk said on Friday it would continue to reroute around Africa via the Cape of Good Hope until safe passage through the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden area was ensured for the longer term.
The Houthis will limit their attacks on commercial vessels to Israel-linked ships provided the Gaza ceasefire is fully implemented.
However, they have conditioned their halt in attacks on US or UK-linked shipping with various provisos, which has added to caution on any return, shipping and insurance sources say.
The Houthis on Wednesday freed the crew of the Galaxy Leader, a vessel that the militia seized more than a year ago.
In another development, the UN has suspended all travel into areas held by Houthis after the militia detained more of their staff.
The Houthis have already detained UN staffers, as well as individuals associated with the once-open US Embassy in Sanaa and aid groups.
“Yesterday, the de facto authorities in Sanaa detained additional UN personnel working in areas under their control,” the UN statement read.
“To ensure the security and safety of all its staff, the United Nations has suspended all official movements into and within areas under the de facto authorities’ control.”
Before Friday, the UN had a total of 16 Yemeni staff in Houthi detention.
Staffers were trying to get a headcount across the UN agencies working in the country and had halted their work, which provides food, medicine, and other aid to the impoverished nation.
In June, the UN acknowledged the Houthis detained 11 Yemeni employees under unclear circumstances as the militia increasingly cracked down on areas under their control.
Several dozen others from aid agencies and other organizations are also held.
The UN added that it was “actively engaging with senior representatives” of the Houthis.

 


Sudan army breaks paramilitary siege on key base: military source

Updated 24 January 2025
Follow

Sudan army breaks paramilitary siege on key base: military source

  • “Our forces were able to lift the siege on the Signal Corps,” the source in the Sudanese army told AFP
  • “This victory opens the way to link our forces in Bahri (Khartoum North) with our forces in the General Command“

PORT SUDAN: The Sudanese army broke a paramilitary siege on one of its key Khartoum-area bases on Friday, paving the way to also freeing the besieged military headquarters, a military source said.
The paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) had since the outbreak of the war with Sudan’s army in April 2023 encircled both the Signal Corps in Khartoum North and the General Command of the Armed Forces, its headquarters just south across the Blue Nile river.
“Our forces were able to lift the siege on the Signal Corps,” the source in the Sudanese army told AFP.
With a months-long communications blackout in place, AFP was not able to independently verify the situation on the ground.
The RSF could not be immediately reached for comment.
“This victory opens the way to link our forces in Bahri (Khartoum North) with our forces in the General Command,” the military source said, requesting anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.
A military source had previously told AFP the army was advancing closer to Khartoum North following days of military operations aimed at dislodging the RSF from fortified positions in the city.
This comes around two weeks after the army reclaimed the Al-Jazira state capital Wad Madani, just south of Khartoum, securing a key crossroads between the capital and surrounding states.
The army and the RSF had seemed to be in a stalemate since the military nearly a year ago seized control of Omdurman — Khartoum’s twin city on the west bank of the Nile.
RSF has controlled Khartoum North on the east bank.
They have regularly exchanged artillery fire across the river, with civilians reporting bombs and shrapnel often hitting homes.
The military source said Friday’s advance “will secure Omdurman from the artillery shelling launched from Bahri.”
Seizing the General Command would signal a major shift for the army, securing its positions in all three districts of the capital.
Since the early days of the war, when the RSF quickly spread through the streets of Khartoum, the military has had to supply its forces inside the headquarters via airdrops.
Army chief Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan was himself trapped inside for four months, before emerging in August 2023.
Khartoum and its surrounding state have been torn apart by the war, with 26,000 people killed between April 2023 and June 2024, according to a report by The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.
Entire neighborhoods have been emptied out and taken over by fighters as at least 3.6 million people fled the capital, according to United Nations figures.
Across the northeast African country, the war has claimed tens of thousands of lives and uprooted more than 12 million people in what the United Nations calls the world’s largest internal displacement crisis.
Famine has been declared in parts of Sudan but the risk is spreading for millions more people, a UN-backed assessment said last month.
Before leaving office on Monday, the administration of United States president Joe Biden sanctioned Sudanese army chief Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, accusing the army of attacking schools, markets and hospitals and using food deprivation as a weapon of war.
That designation came about one week after Washington sanctioned RSF leader Mohammad Hamdan Dagalo and said his forces had “committed genocide.”


Israeli refusal to fully withdraw from Lebanon sparks regional concerns

Updated 24 January 2025
Follow

Israeli refusal to fully withdraw from Lebanon sparks regional concerns

  • President Aoun holds talks with US, French officials to urge Israel to meet ceasefire deal criteria
  • GCC, Kuwaiti officials hold talks with Lebanese counterparts

BEIRUT: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Thursday Israeli troops would not withdraw from the border area of southern Lebanon in accordance with the time frame set in the ceasefire agreement with Hezbollah, amid claims that the Lebanese Army has not fulfilled its obligations.
Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun held talks with France and the US to urge Israel to fully implement the agreement and withdraw within the stipulated timeframe to prevent the situation from deteriorating.
Caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati also called on the US to “intervene to ensure the implementation of Resolution 1701 and Israel’s withdrawal.”
On Friday, Netanyahu’s office said that “the gradual withdrawal from Lebanon will continue in full coordination with the US administration.”
However, the Israeli Cabinet decided that “the Israeli Army will remain in its current positions,” warning that “the Israeli Army is prepared for any scenario and will respond harshly and immediately to any violations by Hezbollah.”
Israeli media reports said “Israel is requesting an additional one-month delay in the withdrawal of its army from Lebanon and an extension of the ceasefire agreement.”
The Israeli Broadcasting Corporation said that “the political leadership has instructed the army to remain in the eastern sector of Lebanon,” noting that “the additional period before the complete withdrawal from southern Lebanon may range from days to weeks.”
The development accompanied continued Israeli operations in the border region, particularly in the eastern sector.
Army spokesperson Avichay Adraee claimed Israeli forces “uncovered several underground tunnel routes belonging to Hezbollah in Wadi Saluki, intended for the party’s members to take shelter,” asserting that “these routes have been destroyed.”
Adraee spoke about “the discovery of a stockpile of weapons inside a mosque, as well as a vehicle loaded with weapons, and hundreds of mortar shells, improvised explosive devices, rocket-propelled grenades, rifles and other military equipment.”
He said: “In another operation by the Golani Brigade, trucks loaded with heavy rocket launchers were found, along with weapons depots that contained large quantities of rocket shells, mortars shells, shoulder-launched rockets, improvised explosive devices and military equipment.”
Calls intensified from border area residents following Israel’s announcement to gather on Sunday and demand to be allowed to return to their villages.
On Thursday, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri was informed by US Gen. Jasper Jeffers, head of the international committee monitoring the implementation of the ceasefire agreement, of “Israel’s intention to extend the presence of its forces in several locations in southern Lebanon,” according to information distributed about the meeting. Berri told the general “that people will head to their villages on Sunday.”
In a statement, Hezbollah said that “Israel’s failure to adhere to the 60-day deadline is an attack on sovereignty that requires the state to act and address it, using all international means and conventions to reclaim Lebanese territories and liberate them from the grip of occupation.”
At the political level, Lebanon received further Gulf support for its new leadership.
Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Abdullah Ali Al-Yahya and the Gulf Cooperation Council’s Secretary-General Jasem Mohamed Albudaiwi, along with a delegation from the Kuwaiti Foreign Ministry and the GCC, held meetings with Lebanese leaders in Beirut on Friday.
This visit, along with the visit of Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan less than 24 hours earlier to Beirut, where he met with Lebanese officials and emphasized the importance of implementing Resolution 1701, carry exceptional importance in light of the developments in Lebanon and the wider region.
During his meeting with Aoun, Al-Yahya reaffirmed Kuwait’s “support, endorsement and commitment to standing by Lebanon to provide all necessary aid in all fields.”
He stressed “activating the Lebanese-Kuwaiti joint committees to address the issues raised according to Lebanon’s needs” was of the utmost importance, recalling that Lebanon “was the first country to condemn the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait through the stance of late Prime Minister Salim Al-Hoss.”
Albudaiwi conveyed the GCC’s “unwavering support for Lebanon and its sovereignty,” emphasizing its commitment to “the non-interference in Lebanon’s internal affairs.”
He affirmed that “the GCC is moving toward helping Lebanon in terms of economic development projects after implementing the intended reforms,” noting that “a Gulf program for Lebanon is set to be developed in cooperation with the future Lebanese government.”
Aoun said he hoped “for Kuwaitis in particular and the Gulf people in general to come back and visit Lebanon,” stressing that “the Arab countries’ unity is the cornerstone for confronting current challenges.”
The president affirmed that “after forming the government, we will establish new foundations for cooperation with the Gulf countries,” adding that “the main titles of these new foundations were included in the inauguration speech, which set the rules for building the state.”
Both Gulf officials met with Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam, who affirmed “the importance of working to confront the internal challenges faced by Lebanon during this period.”
Salam stressed “the significance of restoring Lebanese-Gulf relations, which he sees as a priority in the near future.”
The Gulf officials also met with caretaker Mikati and Berri.
The Kuwaiti minister and the GCC secretary-general held a joint press conference with Lebanese Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habibi following a meeting.
Al-Yahya said: “We reaffirm our solidarity with Lebanon, and our firm commitment to supporting its sovereignty and territorial unity, as well as the importance of implementing the UN Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 1701, and the Taif Agreement.
“We look forward to building the best relations with Lebanon and strengthening security and stability in the region,” he added.
Al-Yahya affirmed that “the GCC had called for the full adherence to the ceasefire agreement and the cessation of Israeli hostilities against Lebanon and the UN peacekeeping forces,” pointing out “the importance of the role played by the army and the security forces to achieve security in the country.”
He said: “We encourage the implementation of the intended reforms. There’s a historical chance to overcome the past challenges and start the reconstruction and development process in a way that achieves the Lebanese people’s prosperity aspirations.”
Al-Budaiwi stated: “We are very pleased with what we heard from the Lebanese leadership and its keenness to achieve the needed reforms and the internationally-recommended programs to ensure the country’s stability.
“These reforms constitute the right path toward Lebanon’s recovery. We believe in the necessity to implement these mandatory reforms and the security council’s resolutions, namely Resolution 1701, and the Taif Agreement.”
He reiterated the final communique of the ministerial committee’s extraordinary meeting in regard to supporting the five-nation group on Lebanon.


Gaza life expectancy nearly half prewar levels: Study

Updated 24 January 2025
Follow

Gaza life expectancy nearly half prewar levels: Study

  • Data published in Lancet shows average life expectancy fell from 75.5 to 40.5 in a year
  • Figures could be worse due to collapse of Gaza’s health systems, researchers warn

LONDON: Israel’s war in Gaza has led to a drop in average life expectancy of 35 years in the Palestinian enclave, a new study has found.

The Lancet journal published data suggesting that life expectancy had dropped to 40.5 years by September 2024, having been 75.5 years before Israel began its invasion in October 2023.

Researchers for the study at the University of Pennsylvania said the true average age could be lower as only data from those killed by war injuries was considered rather than overall casualty figures, which were likely exacerbated by the collapse of Gaza’s health system.

Casualty lists from Gaza’s health authorities were cross-referenced with a UN refugee list and census data to arrive at the findings.

“Our life expectancy results show that the … war in the Gaza Strip generated a life expectancy loss of more than 30 years during the first 12 months of the war, nearly halving pre-war levels,” the study’s authors said.

Despite the logistical issues caused by the war, the UN considers the Gaza health data — which claims that 47,000 have died — accurate.

The UN Human Rights Office said it verified the identities of 8,119 people killed from November 2023 to April 2024.

It added that 44 percent were children and 26 percent were women, with the largest age bracket 5-9-year-olds, and that around 80 percent of people were killed in residential buildings.

“Our case-by-case evaluation of the Gaza Health Ministry list of killed individuals did not detect any substantial errors or signs of intentional inflation,” the researchers said.

“It is highly likely that our central estimates underestimate true losses, because they do not include individuals reported missing or under the rubble.

“Even more importantly, our results do not include the indirect effects of the war on mortality.”

A separate Lancet study published earlier this month suggests that the 47,000-casualty figure may be an underestimate by around 40 percent.


Iraq ministry says two border guards killed by PKK fire

Updated 24 January 2025
Follow

Iraq ministry says two border guards killed by PKK fire

  • “They were fired at by terrorists from the banned PKK organization” in Zakho district, the interior ministry said
  • The two guards were killed and a third wounded

IRBIL, Iraq: A shooting which officials blamed on the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) killed two Iraqi border guards on Friday near the Turkish boundary in Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region, Iraq’s interior ministry said.
The PKK, which has fought a decades-long insurgency against the Turkish state, has several positions in Iraq’s northern Kurdistan region, which also hosts Turkish military bases used to strike Kurdish insurgents.
“When the Iraqi border forces were carrying out their duties securing the Iraqi-Turkish border... they were fired at by terrorists from the banned PKK organization” in Zakho district, the interior ministry said in a statement.
The two guards were killed and a third wounded, it added.
A border guard official told AFP that the guards were patrolling a village near the Turkish border when the “shooting and clashes” with the PKK took place.
Baghdad deploys federal guards along its border with Turkiye in coordination with the government of the Kurdistan region and its forces, the peshmerga.
The Iraqi federal authorities in Baghdad have recently sharpened their tone against the PKK. Last year, Baghdad quietly listed the group as a “banned organization” — though Ankara demands that the Iraqi government do more in the fight against the militant group.
Ankara along with the United States deems the PKK a “terrorist” organization.
Türkiye has conducted hundreds of strikes against PKK fighters in Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan region.