Breaking News
Greece and Türkiye Draw Inspiration from Israel's Iron Dome to Develop Their Own Air Defense Systems.
Amid ongoing strategic competition, Greece and Türkiye, despite being NATO allies, are intensifying efforts to develop advanced air defense systems, as reported by Forbes. While their approaches differ significantly, both nations share a key similarity: they draw substantial inspiration from Israel’s battle-tested defense technologies. Greece seeks to collaborate with Israel to either acquire or co-develop systems modeled after the Iron Dome, while Türkiye is pursuing an autonomous approach with its "Steel Dome" project, emphasizing self-reliance against perceived threats.
While Israeli systems serve as a model, Greece's collaboration with Israel reflects its broader strategy to diversify alliances with the US and EU, while Türkiye pursues independent defense development (Picture source: Raphael)
In November 2024, Greece expressed its interest in partnering with Israel to enhance its air defense capabilities. Athens is exploring two main options: co-developing a customized system with Tel Aviv or procuring established Israeli technologies like the Iron Dome or David’s Sling. According to Reuters, this collaboration could involve an estimated €2 billion investment, reflecting Greece’s commitment to modernizing its military. The move aligns with recent acquisitions by other European nations, such as Germany and Finland, of similar Israeli systems.
Israeli defense systems have become a global benchmark. The Iron Dome, designed to intercept short-range rockets and artillery, has proven highly effective in high-density attacks. Complementing it, the David’s Sling intercepts medium-range ballistic threats, while the Arrow 3 targets high-altitude projectiles in the exo-atmosphere. These multi-layered capabilities are particularly appealing to Greece, whose existing military infrastructure could benefit from enhanced protection against evolving threats.
Greece already maintains strong defense ties with Israel. In 2022, it deployed an anti-drone network based on Israeli technology, adapted to its specific needs. This system protects strategic sites, including islands in the Aegean Sea, an area frequently subject to Turkish military overflights. Expanding this cooperation could provide Greece with capabilities similar to the Iron Dome while bolstering its defense posture amid regional tensions.
Türkiye, by contrast, is pursuing a different strategy. It is developing air defense systems independently, as its relations with Israel remain strained due to political tensions, including the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Despite this, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has announced plans to create a system equivalent to the Iron Dome, branded as the "Steel Dome." This ambition reflects Türkiye’s effort to demonstrate its technological capacity without external assistance.
Ankara is leveraging its domestic defense industry to build a multi-layered air defense system. Its low-altitude Korkut and Sungur systems are replacing U.S.-made Stinger missiles, while the Hisar O provides medium-altitude coverage. At the top of this network is the Siper, which can reportedly intercept threats at a range of up to 100 km. However, Türkiye’s acquisition of Russian S-400 systems in 2019 remains unresolved due to sanctions and NATO compatibility concerns, leaving them unintegrated into its broader defense network.
The longstanding rivalry between Greece and Türkiye, rooted in historical disputes over the Aegean Sea, the Eastern Mediterranean, and Cyprus, continues to fuel their respective military ambitions. These tensions, frequently marked by displays of force, justify both nations’ heavy investments in advanced defensive systems.
Israel’s role as a global leader in air defense extends beyond this regional dynamic. European countries are increasingly adopting Israeli technologies to bolster their own capabilities. Germany recently acquired the Arrow 3 system, while Finland, a new NATO member, opted for the David’s Sling. Central European nations, including Hungary and Slovakia, have also integrated components of the Iron Dome into their arsenals. This trend underscores Europe’s growing focus on reliable defense solutions to address contemporary threats, both state and non-state in origin.
The strategic implications of these developments are significant. Greece’s partnership with Israel strengthens its alignment with Western allies and enhances its deterrence against Türkiye’s military activities, particularly around contested Aegean islands. Meanwhile, Türkiye’s "Steel Dome" project aims to address its perceived threats while projecting regional autonomy. These advancements also impact NATO, which must balance the conflicting interests of these two member states. Additionally, such initiatives may prompt other regional actors, like Cyprus or Egypt, to invest in their own defense capabilities, further militarizing an already volatile area.
Although Israeli systems serve as a model, their influence on Greek and Turkish strategies is not absolute. Greece’s collaboration with Israel is part of a broader effort to diversify its alliances, which include closer ties with the United States and the European Union. These relationships play a significant role in shaping its military procurement decisions. Similarly, Türkiye’s "Steel Dome" reflects a pursuit of technological sovereignty, even if the concept draws from Israel’s success. Furthermore, strained Israeli-Turkish relations have driven Ankara to rely on domestic industries and alternative partners like Russia and China, diluting Israel’s direct impact on its strategic developments.
The contrasting approaches of Greece and Türkiye illustrate their enduring rivalry and mutual recognition of the need for advanced air defense systems. Greece’s collaborative efforts with Israel align with its broader strategic partnerships, while Türkiye’s focus on self-reliance underscores its ambition to achieve autonomy. These divergent paths reflect not only political choices but also distinct strategies for addressing contemporary security challenges. Against the backdrop of rising global tensions, these developments highlight how historical rivalries continue to shape military priorities in the region.