Greek-Russian ties strenghthened: Greek PM visits Moscow

[achilles]

Greek PM in Moscow for energy talks
Email|Print| Text size – + By Derek Gatopoulos
Associated Press Writer / December 17, 2007
ATHENS, Greece—Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis is due in Moscow on Monday for an official visit focused on expanding energy and military cooperation between Russia and NATO member Greece.

more stories like thisThe three-day trip will include talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin amid ongoing negotiations for Greece to buy more than 400 Russian tanks.

Defense officials have announced few details of the possible deal, but state television and other Greek media said the government plans to spend 1.2 billion euros ($1.7 billion) on buying BMP-3M infantry fighting vehicles.

The negotiations will take place amid fresh strains between Moscow and NATO countries after Russia suspended participation this week in the Conventional Forces in Europe arms control treaty.

Greece remains keen to keep pace in military development with regional rival Turkey. It has added Russian weapons to its arsenal to diversify its armed forces, including the S-300 surface-to-air missile system.

On Friday, Karamanlis rejected suggestions he was trying to appease Moscow with the tank deal after supporting a pipeline project that would compete with Russian suppliers and eventually transport natural gas from Azerbaijan to Italy.

Full article: http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2007/12/17/greek_pm_in_moscow_for_energy_talks/

[Rictor]

Why would Greece buy Russian tanks? Aren't they getting Leo 2A6s from Germany?

[KillerBD]

Why would Greece buy Russian tanks? Aren't they getting Leo 2A6s from Germany?

Greece has bought alot of other Russian hardware before. Such as the BMP-3s that Greece operates were all bought from Russia.

[RomanS]

Why would Greece buy Russian tanks? Aren't they getting Leo 2A6s from Germany?

Because Greece does what Greece wants.

[Amateur]

Why would Greece buy Russian tanks? Aren't they getting Leo 2A6s from Germany?

Actually the article is misleading; there has never been any talk of Greece buying russian tanks. The only deal refers to the 400-450 BMP-3s that has already been announced; obviously the journalist doesn't know the difference between a tank and an AIFV, and uses the term "tank" wrongly while actually referring to the BMP-3.

[achilles]

Actually the article is misleading; there has never been any talk of Greece buying russian tanks. The only deal refers to the 400-450 BMP-3s that has already been announced; obviously the journalist doesn't know the difference between a tank and an AIFV, and uses the term "tank" wrongly while actually referring to the BMP-3.

Exactly...



http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_politics_3427612_19/12/2007_91334

[Rictor]

My mistake. I thought that since he mentioned IFVs by name in another paragraph, the reporter knew the difference and deliberately referred to tank purchases.

[achilles]

Because Greece does what Greece wants.

Not fully, but getting there ;)

[saladin]

It has added Russian weapons to its arsenal to diversify its armed forces, including the S-300 surface-to-air missile system.

According to Greek Cyproit newspaper Politis, S-300 in Crete were inactive since their transfer. Is this true or the newspaper is mistaken?

[saladin]

Greece has bought alot of other Russian hardware before. Such as the BMP-3s that Greece operates were all bought from Russia.

I guess you meant BMP-1s or Greek Cypriot's BMP-3s.

[achilles]

According to Greek Cyproit newspaper Politis, S-300 in Crete were inactive since their transfer. Is this true or the newspaper is mistaken?

"Inactive" meaning that they're just stored there and not ready to be used?

I wouldnt think so.

[Pezy]

According to Greek Cyproit newspaper Politis, S-300 in Crete were inactive since their transfer. Is this true or the newspaper is mistaken?

True. Its a well known "secret" to anyone who keeps a close eye on Greek armed forces (from open sources).Last time we saw them was for a public display/photo opportunity before 3 1/2 or 4 years ago(?) in Crete to appease our Turkish brothers.
On the other hand, you may read somewhere that the S-300 has been successfully integrated in the Greek Air-Defence but Greece keeps a low profile for this or that....
Or you may read this if you are greek speaking and says Greece will upgrade its system to S-400....greek paradoxp-). For you Achilles.

http://www.army.gr/daily_press/20071219/8.jpg

[achilles]

For you Achilles.

http://www.army.gr/daily_press/20071219/8.jpg

Those are pretty good news indeed...got to love those brand new S-400 that can also counter stealth technology.

[phoebus]

Because Greece does what Greece wants.

Spot on my friend! At least we're trying to do just that. I hope more aquisitions of russian equipment will follow, namely S-400, more Kornets and Pantsir. p-)

[chris450]

True. Its a well known "secret" to anyone who keeps a close eye on Greek armed forces (from open sources).Last time we saw them was for a public display/photo opportunity before 3 1/2 or 4 years ago(?) in Crete to appease our Turkish brothers.
On the other hand, you may read somewhere that the S-300 has been successfully integrated in the Greek Air-Defence but Greece keeps a low profile for this or that....
Or you may read this if you are greek speaking and says Greece will upgrade its system to S-400....greek paradoxp-). For you Achilles.

http://www.army.gr/daily_press/20071219/8.jpg

wrong..the system was and still is operational and was displayed in atleast 4 "HAF open days" and other oportunities in Crete, last one in '06...certain media of the defence sector in Greece like to speculate and are jealous of local tabloids....unfortunately they are considered prised defence journalists too..

one would hardly spend so much money and effort into integrating the system in our AA network if it was just "stored" in some shelters in Crete...there is a political (and not only)agenda behind the media controversy on the Greek S-300...

its quite convenient aint it? the very fact that we still argue if its operational or not after almost a decade in service should tell some of us a lot

no acceptance tests=not operational is a bit oversimplistic when the system officially is Cypriot property (up to a few days ago when the agreement with the Republic of Cyprus was signed)..but what the heck..as long as unwanted guests keep peaking on a weekly basis...p-)

the 2 batteries are officially Greek gov property and an upgrade in S400 in scheduled as recent reports indicate

[Pezy]

wrong..the system was and still is operational and was displayed in atleast 4 "HAF open days" and other oportunities in Crete, last one in '06...

They were operational until the Olympic Games in 2004 providing shield for Heraklion.After that, they probably needed some heavy maintenance from the manufacturer and/or spare parts and since Cyprus (owner) wasn 't willing to pay they ended up in some warehouses/shelters.
One of the reasons they are publicly displayed every year (you say so and i have no reason not to believe you, although no such new presentations/photos have been seen in magazines the last 3 years) is to reassure our Turkish and non-Turkish friends that the S-300 remain in Crete (Greece) and they have not been secretly removed to Cyprus where they should be....this also answers to the "Greece does what Greece wants to" post.It doesn 't mean they are operational.

But if they are, why hasn 't the MoD put an end to the S-300 saga?Lately "ΣΤΡΑΤΗΓΙΚΗ" publicized the problem breaking the code of silence that lasted for years.Is it waiting for the story to make it to the 20:00 news?Relations with a brotherly nation and internal politics is my 2 cents worth opinion.

[Pezy]

Oops:cantbeli:....just saw Saladins post again or should i say for the 1st time....oh man, i really made a fool of myself :oops: ,there goes my limited credibility....


My sincere appologies...

[chris450]

They were operational until the Olympic Games in 2004 providing shield for Heraklion.After that, they probably needed some heavy maintenance from the manufacturer and/or spare parts and since Cyprus (owner) wasn 't willing to pay they ended up in some warehouses/shelters.
One of the reasons they are publicly displayed every year (you say so and i have no reason not to believe you, although no such new presentations/photos have been seen in magazines the last 3 years) is to reassure our Turkish and non-Turkish friends that the S-300 remain in Crete (Greece) and they have not been secretly removed to Cyprus where they should be....this also answers to the "Greece does what Greece wants to" post.It doesn 't mean they are operational.

But if they are, why hasn 't the MoD put an end to the S-300 saga?Lately "ΣΤΡΑΤΗΓΙΚΗ" publicized the problem breaking the code of silence that lasted for years.Is it waiting for the story to make it to the 20:00 news?Relations with a brotherly nation and internal politics is my 2 cents worth opinion.

the same Stratigiki that sounds the alarm every time a M2K "lands without
a missile"? has the MoD issued a statement of that? ofcourse not,they cant deny all the "exclusives" people tend to print now and then

not seeing photos on magazines the last 3 years hardly qualifies as a reason to believe they are not operational..not to mention the source of the story..as you know during HAF open days the public has access to all the displayed systems...:)

low availability doesnt nessesarily mean not functional and stored in a box..even if we do take the mentioned reports in account

[Pezy]

the same Stratigiki that sounds the alarm every time a M2K "lands without
a missile"? has the MoD issued a statement of that? ofcourse not,they cant deny all the "exclusives" people tend to print now and then

My point was the guilty/suspicious silence of the MoD/HAF conscerning the S-300 for the last several years, even though there are reports and rumours (making the headlines at "Σ" lately) about its status.It wasn 't about the "Σ" article.I don 't read "Σ".
After 1 month of the M2k "incident" we knew the truth...after how many years will we learn the truth about S-300?


not seeing photos on magazines the last 3 years hardly qualifies as a reason to believe they are not operational..not to mention the source of the story..as you know during HAF open days the public has access to all the displayed systems...:)

Its probably much longer than that but i keep track of the defence press only the last 3 years.Wasn 't it you who reversed and used the "photo" arguement in his favour by saying "was displayed in atleast 4 "HAF open days" and other oportunities in Crete, last one in '06"?The difference is that i 'm talking about presentations to the press with interviews and photos/videos of the systems in operation and not static displays for the public.In all those years you think HAF hasn 't received numerous requests from the press about the S-300 only to be turned down?


low availability doesnt nessesarily mean not functional and stored in a box..even if we do take the mentioned reports in account

This is far more probable than the "operational" status and i certainly hope it 's true.But i 'm keeping my doubts based on these facts:

1.Greece never wanted or needed the S-300 (was interested in a couple of PAC-2 that she was leasing)
2.Greece never signed a contract with the Russians about the follow-on support of the S-300 (unlike Cyprus that was quick to do so for its Tor-M1 that were given to her by Greece in exchange for the S-300)
3.Only recently they became officially Greek property thus overcoming perhaps some serious legal problems that we are not aware of and were preventing their continuous use.
4.The last 10 years we 've seen many firing tests of OSA-AKM, Tor-M1, HAWK and PAC-3 at the ΠΒΚ but never one with the S-300.
5.The lack of information about the S-300 from the press and the refusal of MoD/HAF to address repeated press reports about its status.

PS. We should have made a thread in the General forum....anyway ΧΡΟΝΙΑ ΠΟΛΛΑp-)

[chris450]

My point was the guilty/suspicious silence of the MoD/HAF conscerning the S-300 for the last several years, even though there are reports and rumours (making the headlines at "Σ" lately) about its status.It wasn 't about the "Σ" article.I don 't read "Σ".
After 1 month of the M2k "incident" we knew the truth...after how many years will we learn the truth about S-300?as i said above the "silence" is not guilty nor suspicious,they cant deny 24/7 every exclusive story someone decides to publish...Impressive titles and colourfull descriptions should be kept out of the defence press,and where they belong..
besides the uncertainty created serves its purpose too

PS we knew the truth on the M2K incident a couple days later..but only a glance at the source of the story and the sensetionalist tone it used gave a pretty clear picture before that..




Its probably much longer than that but i keep track of the defence press only the last 3 years.Wasn 't it you who reversed and used the "photo" arguement in his favour by saying "was displayed in atleast 4 "HAF open days" and other oportunities in Crete, last one in '06"?The difference is that i 'm talking about presentations to the press with interviews and photos/videos of the systems in operation and not static displays for the public.In all those years you think HAF hasn 't received numerous requests from the press about the S-300 only to be turned down?how many stories on the KEPIK of lets say the 110PM have we seen the last 5 years?..none..does this mean it is not operational? cmon..
the reason i am sticking with the photo thing is that i have pictures from the last display in Heraclion..someone who wants to avoid publicity and the questions that follow does not diplay a full battery..

i am sure a visit in a live battery would convince us beyond any doubt but the airforce seems to be somewhat hostile towards requests to visit such critical systems and instalations...go figure


1.Greece never wanted or needed the S-300 (was interested in a couple of PAC-2 that she was leasing)are you talking about the airforce the MoD or the Gov?who didnt want the Russian system? thats a bold statement,i am not sure i agree with you..Greece was in need of a long range SAM and the russian system was much more capable ,and a lot of officers were in favor

the PAC-2 were part of the part of the offset for the PAC-3 deal and were returned later on...meaning the deal was already signed at the time


2.Greece never signed a contract with the Russians about the follow-on support of the S-300 (unlike Cyprus that was quick to do so for its Tor-M1 that were given to her by Greece in exchange for the S-300)true,resulting in low availability over the years


3.Only recently they became officially Greek property thus overcoming perhaps some serious legal problems that we are not aware of and were preventing their continuous use."were not aware"?how do you know that? how do you know that such problems prevented their contiuous use?

does the fact that we had just signed a multi million dollar deal acquiring the main US competitor of the system ,had anything to do with this whole story?
did that create any problems with the attempt to link the system with the rest of the AA umbrella?how can one spent so much money in an effort to link up a non operational boxed system?-an effort that resulted in complete success btw-

i cant say more things on the operational status,but you cant rest assured that this is a case of egine i trixa trixia..

64N6Es are really big fu.ckers...


4.The last 10 years we 've seen many firing tests of OSA-AKM, Tor-M1, HAWK and PAC-3 at the ΠΒΚ but never one with the S-300.you cant test fire a system that is not yours...acceptance tests are followed by protocols that must be signed etc..now that all the legal problems have been corrected ,it has been known that test firing will follow in the near future


5.The lack of information about the S-300 from the press and the refusal of MoD/HAF to address repeated press reports about its status.
:)

Happy new year

[Pezy]

are you talking about the airforce the MoD or the Gov?who didnt want the Russian system? thats a bold statement,i am not sure i agree with you..Greece was in need of a long range SAM and the russian system was much more capable ,and a lot of officers were in favor

the PAC-2 were part of the part of the offset for the PAC-3 deal and were returned later on...meaning the deal was already signed at the time

Greece had opted for the PAC-3 (not the S-300) and bought 6 batterries .Provisions included in the contract stated that while waiting for the new systems, Greece would be leasing 2 second-hand PAC-2 systems that she could also buy later if she wanted to.
Turkeys threats finally forced Greece and Cyprus to install the S-300 on Greek soil.Once again any plans and hopes that HAF had on achieving high commonality in a certain area had to be forgotten once and for all...

PS. I read that after 9/11 the US wasn 't willing to sell them...but then again we could have searched for other sources like S. Korea did (Germany).