|
|
|
Iraqi and Coalition forces Order of Battle as of December 31, 2008. |
The January 2009 updates to the Iraqi Security Forces Order of Battle are now available at the ISF OOB homepage. The significant changes to the Order of Battle that occurred in December are summarized below.
Iraqi Air Force.
The Iraqi Air Force continues to increase its training and reconnaissance elements. The Iraqi 2nd Squadron received five more Jet Rangers on December 4. The 2nd Squadron is transferring from Taji and consolidating at Kirkuk by the end of January. The 2nd Squadron was the Huey II equipped search and rescue squadron and the 12th Squadron was the Jet Ranger equipped training squadron. This indicates that the 12th and 2nd have been combined into the new 2nd Training Squadron, probably equipped with 10 Jet Ranger and 16 Huey II helicopters.
The 3rd Reconnaissance Squadron at Kirkuk is getting three more Cessna C208 Caravan intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft soon. This will double the number of Caravans assigned to the 3rd Reconnaissance Squadron.
Also, a new squadron has been reported. The 87th Composit Squadron at Al Muthanna has been reported for the first time. The 87th Squadron is equipped with King Air 350 ISR and King Air 350 light transport aircraft.
Iraqi Arms Purchases.
Major possible Foreign Materials Sales (FMS) for the Iraqi Security Forces were announced and addressed separately. However, there was an error in one of the FMS notices concerning armored personnel carriers. The possible sale of 400 M1117 armored security vehicles and 400 M1126 Stryker Armored Personnel Carriers is not for the Iraqi Police, the vehicles are for the Iraqi Army. The Iraqi Ministry of Defense is holding a competition between the LAV-25, M1126, M1117, and an unidentified Romanian vehicle for equipping the Iraqi Army with armored personnel carriers. Interest in the M1117 for this role is fading. The possible order of 400 M1117s and 400 M1126s, plus the 398 LAVs previously identified represent competing possible orders from the contenders.
The Government of Iraq’s first order of 140 advanced M1A1 Abrams Integrated Management Situational Awareness tanks is scheduled to arrive in the fall of 2010.
Iraqi Army Force Developments.
Training and orientation on the M1A1 tank is completing. Personnel selected from the Armor School instructors and 9th Armor Division will then participate in a three-month train-the-trainer course at Besmaya. The graduates will be instructors for the remaining crews prior to the arrival of their own M1A1 tanks. This allows the acceleration of the fielding of the Iraqi Army’s new armor regiments. As mentioned above, the tanks start to arrive in the fall of 2010.
On Nov. 30, the Iraqi Army 12th Infantry Division’s Headquarters Support Company, 47th Infantry Brigade, and 48th Infantry Brigade graduated Unit Set Fielding in Kirkuk. This is the official commissioning of the 12th Infantry Division and two of its three existing brigades.
Supply and support elements continue to improve, expand, and form. On Dec. 4, the Colonel Adnan Distribution Center, Taji National Support Depot opened. The Iraqi Army’s General Transportation Regiment (GTR) conducted its sixth mission. The GTR picked up 10 T-72s and 10 BMP-1, and delivered them to the Taji Repair Depot. The GTR is ahead of its development schedule by six months. On Dec. 14, the Bayji National Ammunition Depot became independent. The depot supports the northern Iraqi Army divisions.
Iraqi Ministry of Interior Forces.
Advanced training of Iraqi National Police continues. On Dec. 2, the 1st Battalion, Knight’s Ride Brigade, 3rd Iraqi National Police Division graduated Phase III Carabinarie training at Camp Dublin. The seventh battalion, the 1-6/2 INP Battalion, started Phase III on Dec. 13. In the next class in 2009, they start training two battalions at a time (900 personnel).
A new battalion for the 3rd Brigade, 3rd INP Division is being recruited from Mosul. The plan is for 1500 recruits to fill out the existing battalions as well as adding a new battalion.
The Ministry of Interior is expanding its support elements. They are building additional fuel distribution points and regional maintenance facilities. The next step will be a regionalization of the national police. “The objective is a national police brigade or battalion in each province.”
Also, “in the near future protection of (the American Embassy) will be the responsibility of the Iraqi National Police and the movement of political missions will be under the Iraqi protection of the national police forces.” The Iraqi National Police also will work with the Ministry of Interior to create a protection force for the Green Zone. The Central Bank in Baghdad will get a battalion of about 500 to 600 officers. At least one National Police brigade will be stationed in each of Iraq’s provinces. [The Baghdad International Zone transferred to the “Baghdad Brigade” on Jan. 1.]
The Iraqi National Emergency Response Brigade continues selection and training for its expansion. NERB instructors initiated the 20th operator selection course on Dec. 20 in order to meet its growing needs as a newly established brigade. “The primary goal for this class is to increase numbers [of personnel] in the SWAT units at Mosul and Tikrit, which have the lowest numbers in the Brigade,” said an ERB adviser. “The secondary goal is to bring personnel numbers at the Brigade’s 1st Battalion in Baghdad to 100 percent and increase numbers in its support battalion, also in Baghdad.”
A new Emergency Response Unit is forming in Jisr Diyala and the Karbala National Emergency Response Brigade is receiving HMMWVs. Also, a new agency will be created to secure archaeological sites. A similar directorate has already been established to protect embassies and diplomatic missions.
78 Comments
Great to see how the Air Fore and the INP will flesh out in a couple of years. Of course nobody can disregard the fact that the ISF has made truly staggering progress in 2008. Bravo Iraq!
DJ: concerning that unknown Romanian vehicle, I believe that it could be this; http://www.military-today.com/apc/saur_1.htm
The only thing I don’t understand here is if the IA is so insistent in buying into 8×8 IFV/APC’s, why would they consider the considerably smaller and lighter M1117? Or did Textron recently roll out a stretched version that I don’t know about? Granted I know that bigger doesn’t always mean better but would anyone here feel as though the M1117 is a bit out of its league here, competing amongst the Stryker of all things?
TW:
– “Or did Textron recently roll out a stretched version that I don’t know about?”
They tried to sell one for the MRAP competition two years ago, but did not win. As said by MNSTC-I SAO, It does not look to retain IA interest in this competition either. However, the INP is still buying M1117s and I could see the IA buying them for IA MPs and Security Companies.
I suspect they will go with a mix of vehicle buys. The most likely Romanian APC (Yes that one.) and the M1126 fit the role for a basic APC,
but the LAV-25 and M1117 do not. One is a recon and the other is an security vehicle. Both are heavier armed and carry fewer personnel.
Then there is the desire to buy from differing manf for diversity. I could see a scenario where all four are bought, for differing roles…
Update:
The “Baghdad Brigade” mentioned in the summary as taking over the IZ is an IA Security Brigade not listed in this month’s OOB.
It was first reported Jan 1, after the ICOD.
It appears that the originally planned “Presidential Brigade” expanded and split into two Brigades.
The resulting Baghdad Brigade has the security of the IZ while the Presidentials retain the security of the President’s and two Vice Presidents’ quarters, offices, personage, and ceremonies.)
Great reporting as always.
If we wanted to add insult to injury to the Quds Force, I would suggest Merkava 4’s instead of M1A1s, but somehow I think that is rather unlikely.
Great work as always!
‘If we wanted to add insult to injury to the Quds Force, I would suggest Merkava 4’s instead of M1A1s, but somehow I think that is rather unlikely.’
Haha…Good one Alex
Aren’t the Saur’s considerably cheaper then any of the above mentioned alternatives?
How much parts commonality does the Saur have with the TAB-71/77/RN-94 series APC’s (did the RN-94 even get built)? How much commonality with other BTR series from other nations?
Doesn’t Iraq already have some BTR series vehicles in service?
HIGH
SPEED
COFFINS,
R
Great research, really!
What is the brigade type of the ?6th Brigade?, scheduled to deploy in January? Is that a unit activated as part of the Grow the Army program?
Aren’t any Marine regiments scheduled to deploy to Iraq this spring/summer?
Joakim Ekström:
That is an anchor in the infantry symbol for 6th.
USMC RCT6 deploys this month to replace RCT1 and RCT5.
US Marine Regimental Combat Teams are the equivalent sized formation to US Army Brigade Combat Teams.
Note: RCT8’s deployment has been canx according to MNF-I PAO.
The prolonged lack of developments about artillery is somewhat puzzling at this stage.
Marcello:
No joke.
They cannot be independent, even as an infantry army without arty…
Which means it has to happen within the next two years or that deadline becomes a problem.
Factoring in purchase and delivery, they have to order this year to make that schedule…
Things like atgms or manpads can be aquired and issued to existing infantry units, with some familiarization of course, in a relatively short timeframe (of course you cannot equip the entire army overnight for training and production reasons, but you don’t need a lot of time to start).
Fighters can take care of air defense, so aquisition of heavy SAMs can be postponed.
So these holes in the TO&E aren’t of great concern.
However artillery is a different matter. It isn’t just getting the guns, you need to create an organization which has to be integrated with the rest of the army. Armor units, even if not a priority for obvious reasons, were created as far as back as 2005. I have always found odd that no moves were take to do something similar with artillery in the past years.
Marcello:
In 2006 the plan was to start forming FA Rgts in 2008. They are working from bottom up and back then the IA bns did not have HMGs or mortars. That schedule slide when the PM decided to expand the number of IA Divs beyond 10. The training and resourses went to the new divs.
As of mid-2008, the plan was to form Divisional FA Rgts starting mid-2009.
My problem is that I have seen nothing beyond Mortars on order. Procurement, delivery, organization, and training will easilly eat up two years. For a basic level of competency…
If the IA is to be independent on the ground by 2012, then the howitzers should already be on order.
This makes me suspect purchasing FA from countries that are more closed-mouthed about arms sales. (E.G. South African Revas purchased for the INP are normaly found out about after delivery…)
4 or 5 M109A3’s were reclaimed from the boneyard at Taji a while back. However, at the time they all needed a minimum 5 month overhaul to be FMC even by Iraqi standards.
And where is 2-25th on the OOB map?
TropicThunder:
I relieved the 2/25 SBCT in Northern Baghdad Province a little early on the map.
56/28 SBCT is taking over for them and has begun deployment.
Left-seat/right-seat time…
Note: Correction to above. RCT8 is deploying according to the Marine Times. Apparently, MNF-I feed me some bum-gouge.
RCT6 -> RCT1 at Ramadi
RCT8 -> RCT5 at Al Asad
“4 or 5 M109A3’s were reclaimed from the boneyard at Taji a while back.”
IOW not even enough for a single battery and with God only knows how many maintenance issues.
Marcello:
Yup.
At 72 tubes per Div, 16 existing IA Divisions, 1152 howitzers/MLRS are required for the existing IADs.
Then there are the 4 more Divs forming, corps’ FA Bdes, and the INP/DBE Divs in their wartime conventional infantry role. Plus ind bdes, etc…
iraq is interested in a combination of G-7 105mm for light artillery G-5-2000 155mm heavy field guns and G6-52s for self propelled units. as if many had forgotten… iraq was always the biggest fan and user of gerald bull’s weapons, and they remain so.
sheytanelkebir:
Any sourcing for that?
As I have indicated, I suspect that option, but I have nothing to base that possibility on…
i thought the IAF had only a handful of Sama CH-2000’s not 16 as you have stated in the OOB
Colonel 2012:
They had 8 at the start of 2008 with 8 more in delivery during 2008.
You might be mixing them up with the handfull of Seekers that were grounded in early 2008 and are no longer operational.
no source. just putting one and one together.
Iraq wants to restart munition production… guess what they are experienced in? ERFB-BB… for which tubes 155mm / 52s… their pet projects were always the gerald bull way (and for a good reason). I suspect if there are any experienced arty guys from iraq’s old army, in the new army in a position of any responsibility then ARMSCOR would have been “in touch” with their old friends…
It also fits in with iraq’s need for the “three core artillery sections”
light field (previously the D30)
heavy field (previously M46 / G5)
self propelled (previously GCT/M109/2S1/2S3)
Iraq had also always been a fan of heavy self propelled mortars… where they would go for that I don’t know. but the G5-2000, G6-52 and G7 fit in perfectly for the army’s needs, the military productions’ previous skills (erfb ammo).
they had a simple formula previously:
long Range + low Cost + cheap and simple accuracy + long barrel life + easy training + locally made ammo = iraqi artillery
Hi DJ
I want to put some perspective on the issue of artillery for the IA
Every one knows that the Iraqi DOD budget is limited, and according to DJ; Iraq is going to buy M1s for five years they are going to buy helo’s for five years they want to buy brand new f-16s plus infrastructure for the jets and a lot of support. Plus Lav’s it’s not going to be one offs, not to mention things that don’t get mentioned by DJ or others like bomb disposal equipment and bomb detection equipment like the one’s provided to the Najef police force recently during the Assurra, and maintenance for all this equipment. They may buy Artillery from South Africa but it’s not going to be G6-155-52 like some people mentioned, since the South Africans are still testing the system!!! And they’re not cheap the UAE bought 72 G6-155-45 and it cost over a billion US. And DJ says they need over a 1000 artillery systems that’s a lot of money, and when they buy artillery it’s going to be towed just like the mortars, priority is the name of the game.
Right DJ?
iraqi procurement is different to uae procurement. unit costs that iraq pays are lower than uae because we only take training for our instructors (not a complete training solution for all enlisted personel), we buy the manuals and maintenance equipment rather than a rolling maintenance contract / we tend to source the trucks and other ancillaries separately (to lower costs…) and last but not least I would expect only two or maybe three divisions to have 36 G6-52s each… at max about 110 tubes. rest of the breakdown would be about 600 G7s and 300 G5-2000.
that would equip the entire army with artillery, should cost maybe $2Bn range + $100M kickbacks.
oh, and the iraqis will make their own ammo (unlike the other customers who buy ammo from supplier). Denel (just like armscor previously) supplied iraq with complete turnkey artillery ammunition facilities. Somehow from the US contracts I can see Iraq isn’t being offered similar deals by the US. Its barely acceptable to buy ammo for M1s (they don’t use much ammo), but to have similar onerous restrictions on artillery (that Iraqis had always chewed through ammo like cows through grass) would be financially and militarily debilitating.
They already have 120mm mortars in the works for half of the existing divs. They plan 18 per Bde.
To round out the Bde FA bns will require 6x 105mm tubes per Bde. 54 existing bdes + training = ~350 105mm howitzers for existing Bdes.
The Iraqis are probably looking for a MLRS Btry in each of the DivArt’s two bns. So 36 155mm per Div would would be ~600 total for the existing Divs.
Plus the ~200 MLRS.
This does not include the CorpsTroops FA Bdes or the independent Bdes FA Bns.
And note I am saying existing Bdes and Divs. Four more Divs are planned and in works for a total of 20 Divs/80 Bdes.
The price tag does tend to push them towards towed initially, although they will want SP for the nine planned heavy Divs.
The ammo issue is a non-player for the howitzers. The Iraqis can make their own and the South African guns use NATO standard sized rounds.
The 120mm tank guns on the M1s are a new round for the IA. Hense the ammo purchase.
The USMC returned Iraqi 155mm rounds that they captured from a bunker in DhiQar Province to the Republican Guard near Kut in 2003. Slightly used…
Thanks DJ for the clarification.
i was also wondering with the iraqi army purchasing massive amounts new U.S. small arms like the M-16 and M-4 to replace the aging AK-47 , will they also replace their PKM and DSHK machine guns with the M-240 and M2 ?
Thanks
Colonel 2012
There are no plans to change LMG/HMGs types in the ISF.
Part of the Serbian buy was LMG/HMGs.
Also, the MoI plans to continue using AKs.
Only the MoD forces are switching personal arms to M4/M16s.
“no source. just putting one and one together.”
Then, as much as I like Denel guns myself, you are just speculating. By the time OIF came around iraqi G5/GHN-45s (the ones which survived very aggressive counterbattery during GW1 that is) were deadlined and rusting in boneyards, like most of the western artillery, and were sold for scrap. I doubt any related production line was kept in any semblance of readiness and in any case the military industrial infrastructure was aggressively looted after the war. Any surviving ammo is probably past safe use too.
In short probably no iraqi has touched a G5 in a decade, the machine tools are gone, and the related personnel is God only knows where, if they survived the insurgency in first place. On top of that money is rather tight.
Marcello
Most of the weapons manf and repair facilities were not looted. They were co-located on military installations that the coalition occupied.
They were also not on the target lists in 2003. We intentionally left them mostly intact.
That is why Taji is still able to support T72 repair and rebuild. That is why Iskandariyah, which used to build BTR-60s and trucks, is now building busses and trucks.
The problem concerning personnel is possibly your only valid argument and that was US State Dept policy. They wanted to privatize all of the industry. So most of the facilities sat unused until DoD took over and started pushing putting them back operational in 2006.
However, it has not been a decade. Just under 6 years since they last handled them. I am still considered trained well enough to be recallable by the USN that long after retirement, so why shouldn’t they be?
“Most of the weapons manf and repair facilities were not looted.”
I have read stories of machine tools and the likes being carted off to Iran from iraqi military industries. Might have been blown out of proportion but still…
“That is why Taji is still able to support T72 repair and rebuild.”
Normal maintenance of a few tens of T-72s does not require a significant industrial base. And the few iraqi army vintage T-72s in service have been noted here to have been in poor condition, so rebuilding capabilities can be discounted. Besides they were apparently forced to import spares for them even during the embargo era rather than being self sufficient.
“That is why Iskandariyah, which used to build BTR-60s”
This is the very first time I heard about it. I would tend to doubt it. Overhaul or imported kits assembly maybe, but production?
No such mention anywhere and they would have made a fuss about it for internal propaganda if anything else. Any more details?
“However, it has not been a decade. Just under 6 years since they last handled them. ”
You are assuming that they were operational till 2003. Most of the western equipment was used till they ran out of spare at some point in the 90’s and then left to rust in some boneyard. I have plenty of pictures of that.
I MEF used captured Iraqi 155mm rounds against RG forces south and west of Kut in 2003. The RG engaged had South African 155mm’s…
All of the early armor used to form what is now the 34th Bde (originally the 1st Mech Bde) was salvaged and rebuilt in 2004. Taji is still rebuilding/salvaging armor of all types and doing repair and rework. They also are refurbishing the 8500 used HMMWVs being turned over by the end of the year.
Iskandariyah was building BTR60s thru the 80s/90s.
It restarted building busses and trucks with some simple funding and contracts. The equipment was still all there.
The only component of the T72 that the Iraqis were not capable of manf at Taji were the 125mm guns.
The single biggest problem that limited the IA in the 90s was HET tires. Key chemicals in manf of heavy-duty tires was unavailable.
Major machine tools are not so easy to move and most of the facilities were surprisingly intact when DoD did their survey in 2006 to determine which could be brought back on-line. You should ignore the press on this subject. According to them, the entire country was exported to Iran by looters.
I am not assuming anything. You are. I used to do targeting work on Iraq…
marcelloo its true I am simply speculating. however the evidence does point towards g5/g6/g7 as the ideal solution for iraq’sd artillery, adn in addition to the above mentioned issues, one of the key points is that Iran now fields erfb-bb ammunition with their 1100 pieces of M46-130mm… iraq needs to counter that and m198s etc… certainly won’t.
similar situation with regards to helicopters. I fully expect that the rational choice for attack helicopter would be the Mi-28N. lets wait and see.
sheytanelkebir
Iraq is not planning to buy Russian attack helos.
The Iraqi MoD does not want “Russian Junk”.
MNSTC-I has tried to push them towards some Russian systems and IMoD just does not want anything to do with their weapons.
The only reason they bought Mi17s was because they had 900 pilots and engineers that were quallified on them and only needed refresure training. It was a question of rapid fielding.
They are buying US and western European as primaries for aircraft…
Bell407 and EC535s are the current planned airframes.
Ok look
The key question is what are Iraq’s options, when it comes to artillery?
I think we all agree Iraq is not going to buy used so that means new. So what does this mean? I don’t think Iraq is going to buy artillery from Europe their systems are too expensive and require a lot of maintenance. Russia; may be MLRS but not artillery. Brazil MLRS may be. As for China I don’t think they’re going to go there.
That leaves South Africa, and the US
With South Africa there is the G7, G5, and G6.
With the US, 109A6, M777.
Now I wouldn’t count out the US because of previous experience. Ask most people about the COIN and many will tell you that Iraq would get them from Brazil. The Lav’s BTR3E1 was the choice then they went US.
So I suggest opinions what do you guys think? What do you think DJ?
jack winters
I lean towards South African howitzers.
1. They are not buying east bloc.
2. The Divisional FA Rgts are to be done by end-2011. That means the orders will happen soon or have already been made.
3. If it was US, it would have leaked by now.
4. If it was Western European, it probably would have leaked by now.
5. South African sales are usually found out about after delivery to Iraq or (if before delivery) from the Iraqi side. Very good OPSEC there.
6. I have not accounted for all of the MoD’s part of the 22 billion USD supplemental passed this summer by the GoI.
7. Iraq has maintained its arms connections (legally and not so legally) since the 80s with South Africa (as well as France and a few others).
I would have to agree with the common consensus here. SA really is the best and most affordable option for Iraq and as DJ said if there was some sort of major arty purchase in the works we would have heard something by now. (Besides, its not like Denel makes a sub par product by any stretch of the imagination.)
Now as for rocket arty systems, that I would imagine would have to depend on if they had been sold on the precision capabilities of American MLRS systems. If so then their options are pretty limited to M270/HIMARS systems (Maybe ASTROS III, I don’t know if they were developing precision rockets for them.) If thats not the case and the IA is happy with a saturation type system then they have a whole range of possibilities. Of them however, only a few really stand out. The M270 or HIMARS systems are still completely relevant here but for a reason I can’t put my finger on I just don’t see the IA using M270’s ? Alternatively, the British LIMLAWS system is also a good contender as would Rokestan systems form Turkey. But the most logical one for the IA to acquire is the ASTROS III. They have the most relevant experience with that system and they used to build them under license (Sajil 60) so if what DJ says is true about the manufacturing infrastructure then it is possible they still retain maintenance and limited production capability. Anything Russian is most likley out of the question at this point although you certainly could make a strong case for the BM-30.
DJ .
there’s one succint point you should know when dealing with iraqi MOD guys and their views. there are the anti and pro russian weapons people there… and this is usually dependant on what their units were using in years gone by… e.g. the MiG25 squadron always considered the mirage squadrons to be untermensch… similarly the mirage people deemed the russian aircraft to by flying junk. call it inter-unit rivalry. so whatever may be the opinion of one officer… it really may not be shared by some others (wr.t russian weapons).
as for MLRS… I think that iraq had always operated a mix of light – medium – heavy artillery rockets. but i seriously doubt if the new military would buy light and heavy ARS anymore… just not part of the new doctrine or use case. there may be a medium ARS… in this case I reckon “turkish option” would be the most likely… or even serbian option if they can still make orkan IIs….
The anti-Russian equipment faction is clearly in acendance in the IMoD these days.
Especially in the IA. I suspect that is reaction to losing the wars against modern western equipment while using “Russian Junk” for the last two decades…
thanks for the clarifications.
another issue that has been in discussion is how the air force will provide early warning cover age and vectoring for fighters once the USAF stops being our airforce.
consensus seems to be as follows:
-no more complex expensive ground based radar network / SAM coverage
-reliance on fighter interceptors with coverage provided by AEW&C and tethered balloon based radars.
-The AEW&C has to be delivered by 2010 in time for the F16s arrival.
-The most likely candidate is the B737 AEW&C modified by turkish aircraft industries… they just finished the 4th and final aircraft for the turkish airforce… and i guess its better than laying off the assembly staff…
comments? ideas?
Brazilian R-99A. Much cheaper than a wegetail and just as effective. Maybe the E-2D if a workable deal with Brazil (perhaps Sweden) can’t be reached.
My bet is Hawkeye.
They are buying US F-16 and may buy French fighters too. The E-2 is fully compatable and data link capable with those aircraft selections.
Of course, I am biased, being retired USN…
I have to agree with sheytanelkebir(big devil) about the sam’s
And DJ is right about the E-2, although wegetail would be a great choice. But I think Iraqi commanders have this idea about using ground radars as well. So they might get them from the US.
But I don’t think it’s going to happen before 2012
Right DJ?
jack winters:
The only radars on order or existing that are currently owned by GoI are ATC and those are no where near sufficient.
Factoring in production and delivery time, it will be two-three years from when they order them.
2012 is the very earliest, if they expedited…
Hi DJ
Do you know anything about Iraq buying 2000 T-72s from Eastern Europe, rebuilt to new by US companies with night vision and ERA. According to both al-Hurra and Defense news; this is the Link:-
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3896249&c=FEA&s=CVS
And today the Iraqi Defense minister and a huge military delegation is in south Korea right now discussing possible arms sales the sources said
So do think it’s a good move to get 2000 T-72s in addition to M1s?
And what would they buy from South Korea?
jack winters:
That is a resurfacing/reprint of a PROPOSAL by Defense Solutions that was first made in 2005.
http://www.ds-pa.com/services_av_rebuild.shtml
It is not confirmed.
In fact, the M1 orders contradict the story.
The numbers and prices are mostly wrong.
And Defense Solutions are the same outfit that lost the BTR-3E1 deal.
Ok DJ
I’ll take your word on it, but it does make sense in one point which is that Iraq is not going to get M-60 tanks, nor M-48 at this point, but most likely in the OOB they will use T-72s instead while still buying M1s
Am I right?
And what about the defense Minster and a big delegation staying in South Korea for several days to by equipment for the Iraqi army?
Korea is replacing their M48 Pattons with K1s. So you are undermining the argument.
Also, that Korean jet trainer (A-50) was in consideration in 2007 for potential buy by IZAF…
Note: The story is almost line for line from the old Defense Solutions proposal. and this is not the first time they have claimed a deal that was not…
2100 tanks for end-strength is correct. How many of what type from where, that is the question.
jack winters – FYI:
DJ,
We are pushing back on this story because, as you have stated, it is full of false information and misquotes. Thank you for pointing this out to us. We picked it up this morning and are in full push back mode.
R/
LCDR Russell
LCDR David Russell, USN
Press Desk Officer
MNF-I CJ9 COMMS DIV
Note: The reply was in under 3 min…
great work DJ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Republic_of_Korea_Army
DJ, might Korea be willing to sell Iraq some of its 2550 K200 APCs (or M113s) in 2010 and 2011 as Korea’s K200s are replaced by newer K21s?
Some of Korea’s 850 M48s could also be sold to Iraq.
South Korea has 1027 K1s, 484 K1A1s, and at least 680 K2s that are currently on order.
It is interesting to note that South Korea is exporting K2s to Turkey. I don’t think South Korea will be willing to export K2s in sizable quantities until 2012. It seems to me that Iraq will stick with the M1A1M tank as its most advanced tank.
Is there any data on the cost of different tax? Cost inclusive of upgrades? Total life cycle costs per tank?
Anand:
Look at artillery, air (A50) and air defense (Vulcans) systems. Those are the priorities.
The M113s will not be replaced/available until 2015. The M48s are possibles.
The Korean F/A-50s seems to be more than good enough for Iraq’s needs as a light fighter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-50_Golden_Eagle
Why would the South Koreans be buying so many if it weren’t? Could the F/A-50 outperform any aircraft in the Iranian air force aside from the planned Su-30? Specifically, can the F/A-50 outperform the Mig 29?
How does the F/A-50 compare with J-10 or JF-17 Thunders, that Iran is considering purchasing?
F/A-50 in some ways seems to be a cheaper and simpler version of the F16 (of which Iraq is buying 36.)
The Syrian Air Force’s most advanced fighter in service and planned procurement is the Mig29. Fortunately Asad doesn’t’ have the money to buy more advanced fighters any time soon.
South Korea has one of the most capable militaries in the world. A long term collaboration between the South Korean military and Iraq’s MoD would do Iraq a world of good. Hopefully South Korea will consider sending officers and NCOs to train Iraqis. Perhaps under the auspices of the NATO training program.
I would not recomment O/NCO exchange with ROKA.
They are a draftee army.
It is not uncommon for ROK Officers to hit their NCOs and
enlisted draftees fraging their Officers is also not uncommon.
The counterpart to the watch position that I filled in CNIC at the ROKN command bunker at Chinhae was filled by at least an O-3/LT in the ROKN, usually an O-4/LCDR.
I would love to hear more about the Korean F/A-50s light fighters. I agree they will be the short term priority in MoD procurement. (Oil fell to $37 today.)
This said, why do you say the Koreans won’t sell their M113s until 2015? Aren’t the K21s being delivered annually from this year on (freeing up the older tracked APCs)? Why can’t the Koreans spare some M200s and/or M113s sooner than 2015? Again, I agree that the IA will hold off on ordering many new tracked armored vehicles until oil prices recover, prioritizing artillery, air and air defense.
Re-read your link.
And factor in the M113s transfering to the ROKA Reserves…
I don’t know where the M48 idea came from. Iraq had captured quite a few of them in 1981 and they never bothered making any use of them (and they certainly prefer the T55 to the M48)… but that’s already 30 years ago. Iraq’s strategic priority is to match its neighbours and be able to defend its territory effectively. M48 or M60s simply cannot be any part of such an equation. M113s/ old bmps are fine… but for MBT (or even infantry support tanks, neither of the above ever impressed iraq (even 25 years ago), and its doubtful that they will in the 21st century.
On the other hand korea’s T/A 50 and F/A 50 seems to be ideal to equip the IrAF with low cost airframes rapidly… and they should be sufficient to protect against iran/syria/turkey/saudi in a ground attack role.
Somehow I still wish they go for SU25 variants, but that seems unlikely.
DJ do you have an idea about what F16 variant iraq is getting? If its Block 60s, then they may use them in a pure interceptor role… and delegate all other tasks to T/A 50 F/A 50s… seems like a prudent and low cost mix.
sheytanelkebir:
About 21 months ago,
the second ranking officer in the JFC publically said they were getting M60s for two or three mech divisions.
At the time, the HA and USMC were the only possible sources.
Since then, nothing has shown, which means they probably have canx the deal.
But, it also means that IMoD has considered and at one time was going with Pattons as an option to fill out their numbers.
And Pattons are on par or better than the majority of the tanks in the neighborhood.
Plus there are upgunning programs to 120mm (see Jordan/Turkey/Israel) and the more extensive M60-120S program (replace turret with M1 turret/gun, add skirts, and upgrade drive-train/suspension. Cost half of an M1.)
Even the Iranians are putting T72 turrets on their old Patton hulls while upgrading the drive-train/suspension (Zulfikar).
DJ.
with regards to the earlier article about Iraq’s acquisition of 2k russsian MBTs fitted out with western equipment.
here’s a report on an interview with abbas al bayati a member of the “defence select committee” in iraq’s parliament.
http://nahrain.com/news.php?readmore=45369
he states:
-we are looking to have a variety of sources for our armaments
-we are looking to acquire 2k russian tanks and have them refitted to western standards.
-we are choosing russian tanks to capitalise on the experience of our ccadres in the field and so as not to waste the decades of experience with russian armaments
-cost is another factor in choosing russian weapons for the bulk of the forces.
-we have a long border with neighbouring states and must have sufficient quantities of weapons to cover all possibilities (i.e. the m1s can never be acquired in sufficient quantity to cover all contingencies).
unfortunately the Iraqi MoD’s public affairs has been down for a while… i haven’t seen their bi-weekly newsletter for some months but many details are usually released there if you can get access to it..
further to the T72 story… they are calling the upgraded tank the T91… as we all know, this is the heavily upgraded polish T72… which seems to also tick the boxes with the other claims like laser warning receiver, new armour and thermal sights… could this be an attempt by defence solutions to be a middle-man (sending cash both ways and taking a cut) between iraq and poland in yet another corrupt deal (memories of 2004-2005 are coming back) which involved the 30 year old Mi8s and some dodgy APCs (that iraq got lumbered with).
In response to what sheytanelkebir is saying, and the article in Al -Nahrain, you know many times we have different statements made by Iraqi members of parliament and the Iraqi DOD and MNF-I. But again I still don’t get why Iraq doesn’t get both. For example Iraq buying 1000 upgraded T-72s and other units get M1s. that would cover all the Iraqi unites?
And I put the question again to DJ? Why not?
As for corruption it could happen but you forgot sheytanelkebir that in the article it said the deal would go through FMS so the corruption part is less. Not to mention I personally think that the current minister of defense and his team is the best that Iraq has had for a long time don’t you agree?
there seems to be a CORRUPT deal between a small us broker “defense solutions”, the iraqi ministry of defence and Poland involving the sale of some ex-eastern block T72s to Iraq under the title of “T-91” for $3.5M per piece. The T91 is a polish upgrade of the T72 that has now been superceded in the polish military by the Leopard 2a4. The upgrade never cost more than $250k-$300k per piece, but they are trying to charge the iraqi people $3.5M for it!!!!!
They will try to sell this off as a deal to get tanks cheaper than the M1A1AIM… but omitting the fact that the base tanks are essentially selling for their scrap metal value ($300/tonne) or about $12,000USD each + cost of upgrade.
here’s a link to an article about it.
http://www.yourdefencenews.com/iraq+plans+to+buy+2000+tanks_20817.html
If they go ahead with buying 2000 of these, then the Iraqi people will be ripped off by about $3Bn in a daylight robbery of unprecedented scale!
the people definitely involved in the above deal include the SIIC and Abbas Al Bayati. The defence ministry itself has said nothing about this deal, so there’s no evidence against abdul kader al obaidi (yet).
furthermore one of the main culprits are the small brokerage company “defense solutions” based out of the US. http://www.ds-pa.com/index.html
they wish to “sell” to the iraqi military old t72 tanks with the T91 upgrade package.
the T72 is worth its weight in scrap metal ($12,000)
the upgrade is worth $300,000
price for the people of iraq $3,500,000
quantity that they want to rip us off with: 2000 pieces
amount for money stolen from the people of iraq by “defense solutions” AND the iraqi Ministry of Defence AND Abbas Al Bayati AND all the other shady bunch… $3,200,000,000 USD… that’s $3.2Billion. Enough money to build 100,000 new houses!!! i.e a brand new city for 500,000 people!!
The size of this theft is HUGE.
the people definitely involved in the above deal include the SIIC and Abbas Al Bayati. The defence ministry itself has said nothing about this deal, so there’s no evidence against abdul kader al obaidi (yet).
furthermore one of the main culprits are the small brokerage company “defense solutions” based out of the US. http://www.ds-pa.com/index.html
they wish to “sell” to the iraqi military old t72 tanks with the polish T91 upgrade package.
the T72 is worth its weight in scrap metal ($12,000)
the upgrade is worth $300,000
price for the people of iraq $3,500,000
quantity that they want to rip us off with: 2000 pieces
amount for money stolen from the people of iraq by “defense solutions” AND the iraqi Ministry of Defence AND Abbas Al Bayati AND all the other shady bunch… $3,200,000,000 USD… that’s $3.2Billion. Enough money to build 100,000 new houses!!! i.e a brand new city for 500,000 people!!
The size of this theft is HUGE. – the onl other people to buy into this dodgy deal were the malaysians- but even they can’t compete with the iraqi bunch for blatant stealing!
Latest Quarterly 9010 report out today:
http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/pdfs/9010_Report_to_Congress_Dec_08.pdf
Many parts of the report attack the MoD much more harshly than any public source document I have seen before:
“While the MoI has demonstrated
an improved ability to obligate its
budget, the MoD continues to struggle, particularly
in the areas of support, sustainment, and
infrastructure.”
The drop in oil from $149/barrel to $37/barrel has made the current force structure for MoI, MoD, and Counter Terrorism Center unsustainable:
“The steady state organizations for both the MoI
and MoD beyond the year 2012 are facing
significant funding challenges based on current
budget projections.”
This severe funding shortage has to be considered as a limiting factor in ISF procurement.
I have reviewed the Defense.com article and discussed this with the author.
The deal is still in the early proposal stage.
Defense Solutions is sending a team to Baghdad to try to sell it this month.
This is a resurfacing of a proposal by Defense Solutions that first was floated in 2005.
And yes, it is a rip-off. If the deal goes thru, then start checking GoI MoD personnel for Swiss Bank accounts in really obsene amounts.
– 300,000 to 400,000 is what the T-91 is worth.
– The Pattons are only priced at 100,000-150,000 depending on wear and tear. (That is what they were sold to the HA for in the 90s.)
– And new M1s are only 3mil. The rest of the deal is support vehicles, spares, and ammo.
The price comparison claiming 10mil per M1 did not mention the support structure, parts, ammo, and other vehicles. These would be required for any tank bought.
In Short: The story is about a crooked Defense Solutions proposal that has been around for three years and not bought into by IMoD….
let us hope you are right DJ
PS. this deal has caused a furore in iraq. mahmood othman has sharply attacked the entire idea.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ar&tl=en&u=http://iraqalaan.com/bm/Politics/-2000–2.shtml
apologies for the earlier rant, i was overwhelmed with rage at the idea… it would have resulted in a good $6Bn being siphoned off… insstead of developing the nations defence or building some housing units for the millions living in tenements!
Anand:
And that is news?
Oil prices are down.
That is going to slow the upgrades.
Which is why they have phase 3 in the upgrade plan.
Five years of fudge factor (2016-2020).
IMoD will still push for all they can get in the meantime…
Note the breakdown of the ISOF on pdf pg63: two trng bns in ISOF.
That is evidence of planned expansion despite what the report says. Divisions usually have one trng bn.
Also, the IZAF is adding an 11th AB to the plan. Possibly the new AB that the USMC built at Sinjar?
And there is a tracked vehicle facility at Al Asad as well as the one at Taji. That means 7th Div is priority for conversion to heavy.
INP adding another Bde for Diyala.
Two additional HMMWV conversion facilities approved at Al Ghizlani and Shaiba to accelerate the turnover.
sheytanelkebir:
No problem.
It is a con and the author of the Defensenews.com story still does not realize how much he was played…
With luck, the IMoD will ignore them again…
But if it was a simple con job… then how come abbas al bayati is on the record saying that this is happening? this guy is a senior man in govt. I think these deals are attractive to the iraqi politicians / bureaucrats because there’s a massive scope for “kickbacks”. its got nothing to do with the equipment/needs per se… the only important variable is how much kickbacks can go their way… in this instance the potential kickbacks are enormous, hence the apparent enthusiasm for the deal.
an electronic leafleting campaign in english/arabic/kurdish is being started today to stop the deal.
Hi DJ
Good News
Today on Al-Hurra the office of the commander in chief/ meaning the prime Minster office, announced that Iraq has no intention of buying 2000 T-72 tanks and denies any planes of doing so.
They heard our plea, and since the announcement came from the prim minister office it self which over sees and approves all military purchases has denied it, that means this deal is dead in the water.
What do you think DJ?
jack winters:
Sehr Gut.
It is nice to know that the Iraqi CinC agrees with my estimate.
i had a chat with an advisor of the prime minister regarding this today,… hopefully it contributed to the barrage of criticism. but the iraqis sometimes make such statements to deflect attention before committing the deal… expect an upcoming deal with some “strange” prices… not necessarily tanks. but more than likely involving hand-me-down equipment on which its much easier to create a markup without appearing overtly expensive (compared to new equipment).
our media awareness campaign continues on this subject.
sheytanelkebir:
Watch for the BTR-3E1 deal resurfacing.
Good recon vehicle but, the 8 bns worth were canx for cost reasons last year.
It was a Defense Solutions deal between Iraq and Ukraine.
Hi DJ
Can I ask you a personal question
Sehr Gut , is not plain Arabic it’s a slang meaning “magic of a cat” where did hear this phrase. Iraqi’s don’t say Sehr Gut. We would say sehr bazoona not Gut, and in any case as iraqis we wouldn’t say Sehr Bazoona
Or did you mean something different and I didn’t get it?
Wrong language.
Try German.
Means: Very good.
I spent some time there in civilian clothes (HUMINT) in the cold war years.
I also had a grandfather that never learned english, two of my great-grandparents were immigrants from Germany.
Hi DJ
More news on Iraq’s Defense minister visit to South Korea check out these two links
http://world.kbs.co.kr/english/news/news_Po_detail.htm?No=60587
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2009/ea_skorea0044_01_15.asp
Three important points came out
1. Iraqi officials want to buy military equipment from South Korea; this is not a diplomatic visit.
2. Iraqi officials tested and are satisfied with the T-50 Jet
3. Iraq wants to co-produce equipment with South Korea
What do you think DJ?
More news about Iraq’s interest in the T-50
http://www.koreancenter.or.kr/news/news_foreign_view.aspx?menu_code=02001000&news_id=AEN20090115000100315
what do you think DJ?
jack winters:
I think it would be a good attack bird for them.
And any co-production deal will add to jobs and infrastructure…
Note: Added a couple of those links to the notes for addressing in the next OOB update. Thanks.
Hi DJ
Did you read defense industry daily article on Iraq? They’re saying that you said Iraq wanted to by this aircraft in 2007, you didn’t say anything about this to us?
So what’s going on, is it true or not?
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/TA-50-Golden-Eagles-for-Iraq-05255/
jack winters
Re-read the article.
It says that “the A-50 was suggested in fall 2007 to the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, by MNSTC-I’s Coalition Air Force Transition Team.”
That is not the same thing.
It was part of a group of six aircraft types being looked at by the Coalition Air Force Training Team as possibles for the IMoD to consider…
Note: Purchase and Co-production of TA-50 are also being discussed by UAE…