Bahrain has signed an agreement to purchase Raytheon’s Patriot air and missile defence system from the U.S. Army.

This letter of offer and acceptance allows the U.S. government to begin contract negotiations with Raytheon for production of an undisclosed quantity of systems and missiles.

The 17 Patriot Nations are:

  • United States of America
  • The Netherlands
  • Germany
  • Japan
  • Israel
  • Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
  • Kuwait
  • Taiwan
  • Greece
  • Spain
  • Republic of Korea
  • United Arab Emirates
  • Qatar
  • Romania
  • Poland
  • Sweden
  • Kingdom of Bahrain

“Raytheon’s Patriot Integrated Air and Missile Defense System will ensure the Kingdom of Bahrain is well equipped to defend against ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and manned and unmanned aircraft,” said Ralph Acaba, president of Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems.

“Patriot is continually modernized, enhanced and upgraded, through this 17-nation community, to ensure it outpaces the evolving threats for years to come.”

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

But not the UK! Was the bloodhound the last long range SAM we have had?

Paul T

Yes,remember seeing them at RAF Wattisham in the early 80’s – expect the rationale for not having an equivalent system now is we have managed so long without them ,plus of course the cost.


Rather amusing, given that when they were introduced it was loudly proclaimed that this was the end of the fighter aircraft. A lot of faulty crystal balls at the MOD!


You would think the UK being a nuclear weapons holding nation should have some anti missile or ballistic missile capability on land to protect itself, Hell I don’t even think we have anti ballistic missile on our new destroyers yet or will we even get it!. We have huge early warning radar stations (well mostly American) so why not have missiles. We could buy off the Shelf to save money, but where would we base them and in silos? I could see the SNP loving that idea! So not scotland unfortunately!

Daniele Mandelli

That is the beauty of CASD. They cannot be negated with a first strike, therefore our nuclear assets do not need SAM coverage. The Remote Radar Heads around the UK, ( Portreath, Benbecula, Saxa Vord, Buchan, Brizlee Wood, Staxton Wold, Trimingham, their associated comms links ( Neatishead, Weybourne, Anthony Fort ) and the CRC – Control Reporting Centres ( Scampton / Boulmer ) which are backed up by CAA radar, are RAF Stations Cam, not US. The US pay for Fylingdales, which is a Space Tracking and Ballistic Missile Early warning site, but it is run by the RAF. There… Read more »


For me it seems odd, there was clearly a need up until the demise of Bloodhound so why not now? The threat is the same – Russian aircraft and whilst they may be largely benign now, that could change. There are quite a few European/NATO countries which have it. I would have thought permanent basing in Cyprus would be a no-brainer.

Particularly when combat air fleets are so small now


Bloodhound was designed to deal with medium to high level bomber attacks. With the introduction of relatively long range air and sea launched cruise missiles. It would be a struggle for Bloodhound to successfully defend against this type of threat. At the time there was no Link-16 datalink so could only attack what the radar saw. This led to the long range interceptor requirement that became Tornado F2/3. As the thought was destroy either the launch aircraft before they came into range or have the Tornados destroy the cruise missiles using Sky Flash. Today, it would make perfect sense to… Read more »

and nothing for the population

there are numerous dormant, closed M.O.D establishments all over the u.k if israel can have its shield why not us?


I think the UK is depending on the US to provide SAM coverage for them.


And the rest of Europe.

Daniele Mandelli

What US SAM are deployed in the UK? None I’m aware of.


I think Dan just assumes that. You are right the last USAF SAMS in the UK were Rapiers operated by the RAF Regt.


Yes. While it cannot be proven I have read that the RAF has a thing about SAMs. I also read that the Type 42 would provide some AD in the North Sea. Also, the Army now has full control of our ground-based Air Defence. Perhaps we should have the Aster 30


Something to do with a tornado being downed by a patriot during the Gulf war perhaps?


Type 42, yeah as museum ships.


Here are the details and it aint cheap! The Government of Bahrain has requested to buy sixty (60) Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) missiles, thirty-six (36) Patriot MIM-104E Guidance Enhanced Missiles (GEM-T) missiles with canisters, nine (9) M903 Launching Stations (LS), five (5) Antenna Mast Groups (AMG), three (3) Electrical Power Plants (EPP) III, two (2) AN/MPQ-65 Radar Sets (RS), and two (2) AN/MSQ-132 Engagement Control Stations (ECS). Also included is communications equipment, tools and test equipment, range and test programs, support equipment, prime movers, generators, publications and technical documentation, training equipment, spare and repair parts, personnel… Read more »


Worth it I think.


Yes the lack of SAM protection for airfields and key bases; is a key omission , what scale of patriot cover would we need, after all Bahrain is a small country

Secondly there are not enough Typhoon squadrons and too few air bases for Typhoons. All in all our air defences are somewhat threadbare


Threadbare, yes says it all for all three services.


It’s just the price of US protection.

Dr. Hujjathullah M.H.B. Sahib

Your 17 Patriot nation community sure appears to stick, save one.

Given their current geopolitical orientation, Qatar seems to be the odd man out, unless we have missed out something really salient.

While its buddy countries have or are rooting for S300s and S400s it doesn’t stand to reason that it still sticks to the Patriots !


The UK has great strategic depth in its location , we don’t need Sam capability on our island unless post brexit we have a referendum to go to war with the eu . So far as Russian air force incursions they get intercepted a long way out , UK based missiles wouldn’t add to that. Who is unilaterally gonna target us with icbms in reality ? Iran maybe . As a nato member we perhaps should look at patriot to maintain the balance of power on the eu eastern border vis a vis Russian supposedly new toys in kaliningrad ,… Read more »

and reeves

why is it that when the r.a.f go to bomb places like iraq they come up against multiple anti missile system which have been placed around key sites and cities? the towns and cities of the u.k. have at best a small air force, and maybe a type 45 on the sea to pass the average citizen has nothing air defence for cities like london, devonport, any military site should be protected. but they’re not are they?

better off going with the land ceptor system