The Turkish army has taken the lead of NATO’s Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF), placing thousands of soldiers on standby, ready to deploy within days.

According to NATO, Turkey takes over from Poland, which provided the core of the force in 2020.

“Built around Turkey’s 66th Mechanised Infantry Brigade of around 4,200 troops, a total of around 6,400 soldiers will serve on the VJTF.”

Units from Albania, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, the UK, and the United States will also serve on the force, which is part of the Alliance’s larger NATO Response Force.  Turkey has made substantial investments into the unit – amongst the most mobile in NATO – particularly in its logistics and ammunition requirements planning. The latest models of Turkish armed vehicles, anti-tank missiles and howitzers have been allocated to the force.

NATO heads of state and government decided to create the VJTF at the Wales Summit in 2014 in response to a changed security environment, including Russia’s destabilisation of Ukraine and turmoil in the Middle East.  NATO members take turns heading the VJTF. Poland led the VJTF in 2020, Germany in 2019, and Italy had rotational control of the force in 2018.

Tom Dunlop
Tom has spent the last 13 years working in the defence industry, specifically military and commercial shipbuilding. His work has taken him around Europe and the Far East, he is currently based in Scotland.

43 COMMENTS

  1. Hmmm, let me think. A high readiness force, able to face threats from where? The East, maybe? That would be Russia in my book. How does Erdogan reconcile his Russian supplied S400 systems purchase from a potential adversary?

    • Who knows what that man will do….. he’s very unpredictable and has a habit of rubbing everyone up the wrong way……. even the US, Moscow, Beijing and numerous other neighbours.
      I follow that region quite a lot and as long as ERDOGAN himself stays out of the way of his military top brass’ decisions, the process and exercises/working together etc will go quite well. Many Countries militarys pretty much do their own thing so things normally go well.
      When politicians interfere, that’s when you get issues and problems.

  2. Here is a thought, how come those old 105mm tanks still full fill the Turkish Army’s requirement, when we in the UK scrap our chieftain’s and CH1’s as surplus rubbish. There are probably many scenarios where a good old lump of iron is still effective, thus leaving frontline duties to more contemporary platforms? When the Lugushall depot emptied its 500 + Chieftains to loud publicity, I questioned why such beasts should be cast? The same with CH1 sold off for pence to Jordon who still recognised, the old girls still had a useful life with them? Now we face the possibility of CH2LEP being a ‘bodged bag of spanners,’ is there an argument to do a Turkish, and just live with what we’ve got?

    • Might cost a fair bit but could of stored the CH1 up graded them a bit , for a bit of depth in numbers ,but the MOD does not like expensive ideas.

      • What sickens me dave12, is all that British made armour just thrown away or stuffed in museums when many countries would have gladdly taken them. Funny that the Foreign Office judged the tanks to be too powerful to be sold or donated to many countries? A British made MBT is a B52 in terms of solidity and the ability to be upgraded.

    • In another Afghanistan or Iraq, CH2 in its current form would suffice as it has over the last 17 years.

      The problems arise in a peer/near peer conflict.

      That being said, we are considerably more likely to participate in another Afghan/Iraq over the next 10 years than we are in a peer conflict…

      Even if we find ourselves in a peer conflict, it will be with NATO and British Armour – even if upgraded – is not going to make up the main offensive Armoured contingent. It will be a token addition.

      I do think there is an argument to retain CH2 in its current form with current numbers and allow a certain level of obsolescence as opposed to either scrap completely or reduce numbers to upgrade… with a view to using them in low intensity environments and leave NATO to deal with anything else.

      Once the M1 Abrams replacement comes online, we can then purchase that from the US in greater numbers and benefit from the lower cost per unit etc…

      This way we retain an armoured capability and can retain the skills and knowledge of tank warfare, and deploy in numbers to lower intensity conflicts – without wasting money on upgrades that leave us with to few tanks to have an effective use in anything vs say Russia or China… Or worse lose the capability all together…

      Thoughts on a postcard…

      • You are right, what is the likelihood we will confront peer forces? If the Army had retained CH1 say,150 vehicles, then augment the tank fleet with 400 CH2 the British tank force would have been far more useful, than the ever-dwindling numbers we have today. Too much nonsense was banded about the worthiness of the MBT in recent years, to the point, it began to influence the debate, in the wrong direction! Many armies around the World operate old tanks from the 20th century and they are still fit for purpose due to potential foe being in a similar situation. At the end of the day, a CH1 acting as a blockade or for peripheral policing would still be a formidable obstacle and could be for years to come. I’d rather be sat in a CH1(with its Chobham armour) at a roadblock station than a Warrior. The drawdown of Chieftain and CH1 was a crass and shortsighted policy, leaving the Army willfully lacking in MBT strength and I can’t see the situation improving anytime soon.

        P.S. The all-new M1 will have to offer alternative power packs for it to be considered by the MOD.

    • To me, the biggest crime is the abandonment of an UK design and build capability for MBTs (like so many other capabilities).

      This should have been seen as a National Strategic capability and treated as such. For example a small trickle of MBTs should be in continuous manufacture alongside refurbs/repairs and upgraded versions, and a small design team and project kept alive for the next generation tank.

      As things stand we are ditching the MBT and relying on others (USA/German companies) for heavy armour. Far better to spend the money in the UK and benefit the wider economy.

      • Well said AlbertStarburst, an industry that was there to build and support our troops. Sadly, like so many such institutions they were seen as too established and disproportionate to the numbers manufactured. Would they apply the same nonsense to building our nuclear submarines……No of cause not!

        • The problem is, once they dropped the the CH2 order to less than 400 and it failed to pick up serious orders, the manufacturing capabilities were hard to justify, since the required numbers were cut to only 250, it’s frankly impossible.

          I don’t think you can use the SSN analogy, as a single RN SSN could gut most navies, simply put, one boat is hugely capable asset.

          I’m deeply uneasy about loosing MBT capability and think 250 is the absolute minimum needed in the active fleet to generate a deployable armoured division with 80 – 100 tanks at its heart.

          If we drop to 150, as has been suggested by some, it’s extremely difficult to justify retaining MBT capability.

          • What I’m saying John, is the importance of a British-made MBT is as relevant today as it was when first introduced in WW1. Nothing has come along that spelled the death of the tank, it has proved to be the backbone of most armies and will continue to be a relevant weapon. So why use numbers or even costs when talking about retaining manufacturing capability? Hence my analogy with the Trident subs, to my mind, a MBT is still a key national asset and we need to retain the ability to design and make more if required. By the way, I’d rather have a miserable 150 CH2LEP than nothing at all. This debate will continue to generate discussion I guess?

          • It certainly will Maurice, I totally see were you are coming from and largely agree with your sentiment.

            I’m deeply uneasy about loosing MBT capability, but once the numbers drop below the ability to form an armoured division, they become under great risk.

            Defence planners will identify that they cannot be deployed in the number required ( based on the last 30 years of use) and money is best spent elsewhere.

            I’m not saying I agree, it’s just the current direction of travel…

            Who knows, we didn’t see the increase in defence spending, so maybe the endless retreat from a well rounded defence capability has finally stopped and we will maintain 250 MBT’s?

            The mood music suggests otherwise, but we can always hope.

          • There was never a Reduction in CH2 Orders for the BA,in fact an Extra Batch was Produced to help keep the Factory Alive.After the Fall of the Iron Curtain it never stood Much Chance in the Export Market due to the Firesale’s of Surplus MBT’s being Offered,Especially the Leopard 2.

      • How difficult would it be though to setup the infrastructure to manucfacture again. GDUK and that BAE RM consortium already appear to be doing it.
        Most of the complexity is in the optics and sensors which should have been funded through continuous upgrade programs that where sidelined for UOR vehicles.
        We have a chance to sort it out now properly with boxer. I don’t see the UK ordering replacements for the C2 until 2040.

  3. Is the UK proposed to lead the VJTF at any point? I see German was the lead in 2019 and due to to take over again in 2023.

    • Don’t know. The UK is the framework nation for another NATO command, the ARRC ( Allied Rapid Reaction Corps ) at Insworth.
      Consists of elements of UK 1 Signal Bde and other UK and NATO elements.

      VJTF in comparison is like an enlarged brigade.

      • Hi Danielle,

        The ARRC was the first, but is now one of 8 Rapid Deployable Corps within NATO.

        The others are:

        1) NATO Rapid Deployable Corps Italy (NRDC-IT) in Solbiate Olana near Milan;

        2) the NATO Rapid Deployable Corps Spain (NRDC-Spain) in Valencia;

        3) the NATO Rapid Deployable Corps Turkey (NRDC-T) based near Istanbul;

        4)the 1 German-Netherlands Corps based in Münster, Germany;

        5)the Rapid Reaction Corps France (RRC-FR) in Lille;·

        6)the NATO Deployable Corps Greece (NRDC-GR) based in Thessaloniki; and

        7)the Multinational Corps Northeast (MNC-NE) based in Szczecin, Poland.

        In addition, Eurocorps, based in Strasbourg, France, has a technical agreement with NATO since 2002 and can be used for NATO missions.

        Each corp acts as the lead corp for 12 months. Spain will take over from the ARRC in January 2022.

        Being the lead nation nation for ARRC should not stop us acting as the lead for the spearhead rapid reaction VJTF brigade. I can only assume we have not yet put ourselves forward for the role.

        • Hi Bob2

          Indeed, I’m aware of most of them, quite a list isn’t there.

          NORTHAG, CENTAG, 2 ATAF, AMF were so much easier to keep track of than these endless new commands and alterations!

          I don’t think the British Army currently has the set up to take on the role, our high readiness HQ elements and supporting formations like Signals are committed supporting the aforementioned ARRC, our own national reaction forces, and PJHQ through the SJF HQ ( L ) and JFLog HQ.

          I think the UK is better suited to providing VHR forces to NATO in other areas like SF and naval and air power. Also, the British Army is in too much of a state regards 3 Division already without having one of its brigades at very high readiness! We struggle to maintain a Battle Group in Estonia already never mind a brigade.

          I would leave it alone.

  4. Is anyone else worried by Turkey taking over this role? Who is best buds with Russia at the moment? Surely, a highly reliable ally should only ever be entrusted with this role.

    • Yes cringeworthy. Turkey should be suspended from NATO while Erdogan is in power, they have not been a dependable ally for quite a few years now.

    • After the S400 thingy, I actually thought that it could be the end of Turkey in NATO but…… Turkey is in a very strategically important location so yet again, they get away with it.
      With Turkey in NATO, it traps the Russians in the Black Sea…… without Turkey in NATO, the Russians can get out of the trap and cause havoc in the Mediterranean Sea, which is not very good, is it fella?

      • Turkey is not the be all and end all to block the strait. With the long range of missiles, radars, etc… this can just as easily be done from Greece or Bulgaria. The strait is a bottleneck which makes it easy to destroy any ship tryIng to cross, literally shooting fish in a barrel with a shotgun.
        Secondly Russia has always had access to the Med. When was it ever denied access to the Med during the Cold War? Lastly Russia already has a port in the Med in Tartus, Syria.

    • I’m a bit concerned about this, if Erdogan gets involved with decision making then things could get tense, if he stays out of the way everything will work well.

  5. Mmmmmmmmm……….. not sure if this is a good thing or not really but what i do know is that the Turks will be itching to show off what they have in the toy box. We already know about the quality and capabilities of Turkish drones and their drone launched bombs and missiles……. we saw them on a daily basis during the recent Azeri attacks on the Armenians, they were quite impressive actually.
    I don’t know what to expect but I’m sure it will be fun and I’m very confident that the Russians will be allowed to monitor it quite easily.

  6. This thread is full of Turkey bashing just out of pure ignorance! Anyone in UK military and government in the know would disagree. During the pandemic Turkey delivered more aid to NATO countries than anyone else! Specially to the UK when the NHS fell apart . So called allies like Trump and Israel refused to sell supplies let alone donate things. Turkey donated 2 loads of planes plus sold the UK supplies at the most critical time.

    Turkey has been the Only country that challenged Russia with Assad in Syria and Libya with Haftar. Yes it paid for the S400 due to US refusing to to sell them patriots to protect its territory from missiles from Syria crossing the border into Turkish towns. The very patriots it supplies to dictatorships like Saudi but not to a NATO ally? Turkey now has developed its own short and medium range air defence and is due for its long range missiles within 3 years. It’s working on its ballastic missiles with a reach of 2500km too and cruise missiles hitting 1000km

    It’s new drone with 700km range has 300km range Som missile which will be a game changer for them . Autonomous boats with anti ship missiles are coming online this year that coordinate with its air drones and frigates . First land vehicles with lasers will come online too .

    Times have changed for Turkey it has changed from an importer of weapons to producing 80 percent of its weapons almost with a aim 100 percent by 2023 and already has surpassed Israel as the largest weapons maker in the region.

    Turkey has a complicated relation with Russia but Turkey never trust Russia for historic reason. Erdogan wants an independent foreign policy from Europe America and Russia .

    Macron is way more warm with Russia along with Merkel than Erdogan as Macron keeps calling for warmer relation advocating with Nordstream 2 pipeline too. For the UK, Turkey has been a strategic reliable partner being Turkey second largest trading partner and keeping Russia in check in the Balkans black sea and wider region . Macronirritates the UK more than Erdogan ever did by supporting Russia in Syria and Libya and in the Karabakh war

      • I guess you never travel out of the country do you? The UK health system falling apart due covid in spring was the first thing everyone overseas asked Brits. Britain has the highest death toll in Europe and leads still in this second wave . That pretty much says a lot of how broken the system that nobody dares to speak about is when it has more deaths than Romania .

        • You watch a lot of MSM TV news don’t you? All you’ve done is made some statements . Look you are perfectly entitled to believe what you want as am I and I stress I don’t want to fall out so i’ll Moderate my usual lingo and respectfully disagree.

          In my line of work I come into contact with the workings of the nhs regularly and am a regular visitor to a very large hospital in my county. I also have cause to access health centres around the county again frequently. As such I speak to Dr’s ,consultants , nurses ,paramedics etc etc. I have family who are nurses on covid wards and also know people involved who are connected with management.(band 8-9 level)

          In order to make accurate assessments and come to logical conclusions you need to evaluate the sources of your intel (information)and importantly the credibility of the source . Let me tell you there are no better sources than human ones. When multiple sources in different areas provide information (evidence) then you can infer what your being told is more likely the truth.

          I won’t comment on the virus aspect as the Folks round here like to censor this topic of discussion so I’ll stick to your claim that the nhs is/was falling apart and I’m sorry Sky news and the bbc might tell you that but that isn’t the picture being painted by the people I speak to certainly not at a local level.

          The nhs like the police like the prison service like the military like most out there face challenges and there are issues nobody is claiming they are perfect however we are fortunate to have an nhs and life in this country overall is nothing to complain about.

          So basically this is just my long winded way of saying the nhs isn’t falling apart and that sky news and the likes are shite and just spin a narrative that the vast bulk of the sheep swallow nod and believe.

          People need to be taught how to think not what to think.

          ???????????

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here