The air force has already ruled in favor of the aircraft, even though it is uncertain that the Americans will include specialized electronic warfare suites: “the deterrent effect that comes with Israel having the most advanced aircraft is very important. This is the effect that was created when we received the Mirage [in the 1960s] and the F-15 [in the 1970s].” In the air force they insist that at a time when the Turkish air force and other Muslim countries intend to procure the F-35, “it is inconceivable that Israel will stay behind.”
Military Export/Import
A leading Israeli defense analyst said the government of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan has decided to end defense and military cooperation with Israel. Analyst Ron Ben-Yishai said the Turkish Defense Ministry has shelved a range of proposed Israeli projects.
Yossi Melman, Haaretz chief military intelligence analyst: “The reason Turkey banned Israel from this week’s NATO air force exercises had nothing to do with January’s war in the Gaza Strip. Rather, it was because of delays in the delivery of unmanned aerial vehicles to the Turkish army, a source in the Turkish Air Force said.”
IOA Editor: Whether it was Israel’s attack on Gaza or the failure to deliver Israeli killer-drones to Turkey on schedule, note that the right to use force, by either country, is assumed to be absolute. Melman doesn’t even mention it, let alone question it.
Turkey agreed four years ago to buy 10 Heron UAVs [drones] for over $180 million from Israeli Aerospace Industries (IAI) and Elbit Systems, Ltd. However, the Israeli firms missed the deadline for delivery.
several Turkish requests are currently under consideration by the Defense Ministry’s Foreign Defense Assistance and Defense Export Organization (SIBAT). These will now need to be reviewed due to the change in the diplomatic ties between Jerusalem and Ankara.
IOA Editor: It is unclear who stands to lose more by stopping Israeli military arm sales to Turkey: might it not be the Israeli military industries?
Another Israel-centered story, suggesting how potentially serious the change in relations with Turkey is for Israel.
According to Jane’s Defence Weekly, the U212s… have a range of 4,500 kilometres (2,810 miles) and can launch cruise missiles carrying nuclear warheads. Israeli media have written that the Dolphin submarine could be key in any attack on arch-foe Iran’s controversial nuclear sites.
IOA Editor: For technical specifications, see Israeli Dolphins Rule The Waves
India will get its first set of lethal drones designed to take down high-value targets like missile sites, radars and even senior enemy personnel by 2011, adding a new dimension to its combative capabilities.
IOA Editor: According to The Marker (Hebrew), the sale will consist of 10 “suicide” drones for over US$100M. The drones are classified as “violent” or “self-destruct,” designed to aim at high value targets and explode onto them. Not a bad deal for the killing-machine maker, Israel Aerospace Industries, at more than US$10M a pop, hit or miss – a far higher return than, say, Jaffa oranges.
Although Lieberman declared he would reactivate Israeli foreign policy in certain African states, past experience has shown that the Defense Ministry and arms manufacturers’ lobby have hijacked Israeli foreign policy in recent decades and subordinated it to their needs, Israeli sources said. No deals were signed on this trip. But Foreign Ministry officials estimate Africa’s business potential at some $1 billion, in addition to the $3 billion of merchandise and services Israel currently exports to the continent.
The Norwegian government has decided to pull all of its investments from Israeli arms firm Elbit as a result of it involvement in the construction of the West Bank separation fence, the Norwegian Finance Minister announced on Thursday… Norway’s pension fund is invested in 41 different Israeli companies… A research project by the Coalition of Women for Peace called “Who profits from the occupation?” found that almost two thirds of those firms are involved in West Bank construction and development.
Ever since the Gaza operation, British MPs and nongovernmental organizations have been trying to persuade London to impose a complete arms embargo on Israel. However, the British government has rejected this demand…
“Future decisions will take into account what has happened in the recent conflict. We do not grant export licenses where there is a clear risk that arms will be used for external aggression or internal repression… We do not believe that the current situation in the Middle East would be improved by imposing an arms embargo on Israel. Israel has the right to defend itself and faces real security threats.”
IOA Editor: Indeed, the British government continues to view Israel as having the right to carry out massive campaigns of destruction against civilian populations, as it did in Gaza, Lebanon, and elsewhere. Such twisted and morally reprehensible positions, along with the very limited nature of the actual steps taken, when evaluated in terms of their impacts, indicate that the “partial embargo” is merely an act of political lip service in the face of growing popular opposition at home to the government’s military support of Israel.
Whether exporting citrus fruit (decades ago) or weaponry (for many years now), Israel’s marketing seems remarkably similar: scantly dressed young women and music — this time dancing around flower-draped missiles.
