RAF FAIRFORD, England: Turkey’s plans to buy the Russian S-400 missile defense system would give a weapon used by “known foes” of NATO deep insight into the radar-evading F-35 fighter jets arriving in growing numbers in Europe, the top US Air Force general in Europe said.
General Tod Wolters, also the NATO Allied Air Commander, told Reuters the issue was worrying, but he was working to maintain strong military ties with the NATO member for now.
“Anything that an S-400 can do that affords it the ability to better understand a capability like the F-35 is certainly not to the advantage of the coalition,” said Wolters, who was in Britain for an air chiefs conference in London and the Royal International Air Tattoo at RAF Fairford.
US and NATO officials want to prevent the Russian-built defense system from accumulating information about Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets just as they are gaining a foothold in Europe.
Norway, Britain and Italy will have a total of 40 F-35s in Europe by the end of the year, with 24 more to be delivered next year and the Netherlands to receive two jets as well, according to a spokesman for the US Air Force.
Turkey’s plans to buy the Russian air and missile defense system have raised tensions with Washington, and US lawmakers are seeking to block the transfer of any F-35 jets to Turkey.
A senior US official last month said Turkey was a key NATO ally, but its purchases of the F-35 would be at risk and Ankara would face sanctions if it proceeded to buy the S-400.
Ankara received its first F-35 jet at the Lockheed plant in Texas last month, although the aircraft will stay in the United States for training.
“The Turks have to make a choice. They’re either going to be part of NATO or they’re going to move into the Russian camp in terms of defense,” said David Deptula, a retired Air Force general and industry consultant.
He said NATO would never integrate an S-400 system into its integrated air defense system because it would give the Russian-built system data about operating tactics and procedures that could be transferred to other users.
Operating an F-35 nearby would also allow the S-400 system to glean key information about range of detection and other characteristics of the aircraft, potentially undermining any element of surprise.
Wolters said NATO was worried about “how much, for how long and how close” any F-35s would be operated near the S-400 systems. “All those would have to be determined. We do know for right now it is a challenge.”
But he said his contacts with the Turkish air force remained “rock solid” despite the dispute over the S-400, focusing on current security threats.
“For right now, all the conversations surrounding that challenge have not hindered at all the strong relationship that we have with the Turkish air force and the great alliance that the two nations have together,” he said. “We want to make sure that for now we’re continuing on that path.”
![]()
Turkey’s plan to buy Russian defense system a risk for NATO: US general
Turkey’s plan to buy Russian defense system a risk for NATO: US general
- US and NATO officials want to prevent the Russian-built defense system from accumulating information about Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets
- Turkey’s plans to buy the Russian air and missile defense system have raised tensions with Washington
Russian poisonings aim to kill — and send a message
- Neurotoxin epibatidine, found in Ecuadoran frogs, was identified in laboratory analyzes of samples from Navalny’s body
- Even if a poisoning can fail — some targets survived, such as Yushchenko and Skripal — it also serves to send a message
PARIS: Polonium, Novichok and now dart frog poison: the finding that Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny was killed with a rare toxin has revived the spectre of Moscow’s use of poisons against opponents — a hallmark of its secret services, according to experts.
The neurotoxin epibatidine, found in Ecuadoran frogs, was identified in laboratory analyzes of samples from Navalny’s body, the British, Swedish, French, German and Dutch governments said in a joint statement released on Saturday at the Munich Security Conference.
“Only the Russian state had the means, motive and opportunity to deploy this lethal toxin,” said Britain’s Foreign Office, with the joint statement pointing to Russia as the prime suspect.
The Kremlin on Monday rejected what it called the “biased and baseless” accusation it assassinated Navalny, a staunch critic of President Vladimir Putin who died on February 16, 2024, while serving a 19-year sentence in a Russian Arctic prison colony.
But the allegations echo other cases of opponents being poisoned in connection — proven or suspected — with Russian agents.
In 2006, the Russian defector Alexander Litvinenko was killed by polonium poison in London. Ukrainian politician Viktor Yushchenko, campaigning against a Russian-backed candidate for the presidency, was disfigured by dioxin in 2004. And the nerve agent Novichok was used in the attempted poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal in the UK in 2018.
“We should remain cautious, but this hypothesis is all the more plausible given that Navalny had already been the target of an assassination attempt (in 2020) on a plane involving underwear soaked with an organophosphate nerve agent, Novichok, which is manufactured only in Russia,” said Olivier Lepick, a fellow at the Foundation for Strategic Research specializing in chemical weapons.
Toxin ‘never been used’
“To my knowledge, epibatidine has never been used for assassinations,” Lepick added.
Until now, the substance was mainly known for its effect on animals that try to attack Ecuadoran poison dart frogs.
“It’s a powerful neurotoxin that first hyperstimulates the nervous system in an extremely violent way and then shuts it down. So you’ll convulse and then become paralyzed, especially in terms of breathing,” said Jerome Langrand, director of the Paris poison control center.
But to the scientist, using this substance to poison Navalny is “quite unsettling.”
“One wonders, why choose this particular poison? If it was to conceal a poisoning, it’s not the best substance. Or is it meant to spread an atmosphere of fear, to reinforce an image of power and danger with the message: ‘We can poison anywhere and with anything’?” he said.
Russian ‘calling card’
For many experts, the use of poison bears a Russian signature.
“It’s something specific to the Soviet services. In the 1920s, Lenin created a poison laboratory called ‘Kamera’ (’chamber’ in Russian), Lab X. This laboratory grew significantly under Stalin, and then under his successors Khrushchev and Brezhnev... It was this laboratory that produced Novichok,” said Andrei Kozovoi, professor of Russian history at the University of Lille.
“The Russians don’t have a monopoly on it, but there is a dimension of systematization, with considerable resources put in place a very long time ago — the creation of the poison laboratory, which developed without any restrictions,” he added.
Even if a poisoning can fail — some targets survived, such as Yushchenko and Skripal — it also serves to send a message, and acted as “a calling card” left by the Russian services, according to Kozovoi.
“Poison is associated in the collective imagination and in psychology with a terrible, agonizing death. The use of chemical substances or poisons carries an explicit intention to terrorize the target and, in cases such as Litvinenko, Skripal or Navalny, to warn anyone who might be tempted to betray Mother Russia or become an opponent,” said Lepick.
“A neurotoxin, a radioactive substance, or a toxic substance is much more frightening than an explosive or being shot to death.”
The neurotoxin epibatidine, found in Ecuadoran frogs, was identified in laboratory analyzes of samples from Navalny’s body, the British, Swedish, French, German and Dutch governments said in a joint statement released on Saturday at the Munich Security Conference.
“Only the Russian state had the means, motive and opportunity to deploy this lethal toxin,” said Britain’s Foreign Office, with the joint statement pointing to Russia as the prime suspect.
The Kremlin on Monday rejected what it called the “biased and baseless” accusation it assassinated Navalny, a staunch critic of President Vladimir Putin who died on February 16, 2024, while serving a 19-year sentence in a Russian Arctic prison colony.
But the allegations echo other cases of opponents being poisoned in connection — proven or suspected — with Russian agents.
In 2006, the Russian defector Alexander Litvinenko was killed by polonium poison in London. Ukrainian politician Viktor Yushchenko, campaigning against a Russian-backed candidate for the presidency, was disfigured by dioxin in 2004. And the nerve agent Novichok was used in the attempted poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal in the UK in 2018.
“We should remain cautious, but this hypothesis is all the more plausible given that Navalny had already been the target of an assassination attempt (in 2020) on a plane involving underwear soaked with an organophosphate nerve agent, Novichok, which is manufactured only in Russia,” said Olivier Lepick, a fellow at the Foundation for Strategic Research specializing in chemical weapons.
Toxin ‘never been used’
“To my knowledge, epibatidine has never been used for assassinations,” Lepick added.
Until now, the substance was mainly known for its effect on animals that try to attack Ecuadoran poison dart frogs.
“It’s a powerful neurotoxin that first hyperstimulates the nervous system in an extremely violent way and then shuts it down. So you’ll convulse and then become paralyzed, especially in terms of breathing,” said Jerome Langrand, director of the Paris poison control center.
But to the scientist, using this substance to poison Navalny is “quite unsettling.”
“One wonders, why choose this particular poison? If it was to conceal a poisoning, it’s not the best substance. Or is it meant to spread an atmosphere of fear, to reinforce an image of power and danger with the message: ‘We can poison anywhere and with anything’?” he said.
Russian ‘calling card’
For many experts, the use of poison bears a Russian signature.
“It’s something specific to the Soviet services. In the 1920s, Lenin created a poison laboratory called ‘Kamera’ (’chamber’ in Russian), Lab X. This laboratory grew significantly under Stalin, and then under his successors Khrushchev and Brezhnev... It was this laboratory that produced Novichok,” said Andrei Kozovoi, professor of Russian history at the University of Lille.
“The Russians don’t have a monopoly on it, but there is a dimension of systematization, with considerable resources put in place a very long time ago — the creation of the poison laboratory, which developed without any restrictions,” he added.
Even if a poisoning can fail — some targets survived, such as Yushchenko and Skripal — it also serves to send a message, and acted as “a calling card” left by the Russian services, according to Kozovoi.
“Poison is associated in the collective imagination and in psychology with a terrible, agonizing death. The use of chemical substances or poisons carries an explicit intention to terrorize the target and, in cases such as Litvinenko, Skripal or Navalny, to warn anyone who might be tempted to betray Mother Russia or become an opponent,” said Lepick.
“A neurotoxin, a radioactive substance, or a toxic substance is much more frightening than an explosive or being shot to death.”
Latest updates
Recommended
© 2026 SAUDI RESEARCH & PUBLISHING COMPANY, All Rights Reserved And subject to Terms of Use Agreement.