The U.S. military has confirmed that at least six F-35 Joint Strike Fighters have been accepted into service without their primary radar systems installed, highlighting growing challenges surrounding the F-35 program’s ambitious Block 4 modernization effort. The revelation underscores the increasingly complex technical and logistical hurdles facing what remains the world’s most expensive and technologically advanced fighter aircraft program.

The disclosure came during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing this week, where Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Gregory Masiello, head of the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO), acknowledged that six aircraft delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps were accepted without radar systems because the next-generation AN/APG-85 radar is not yet available.

The confirmation marks the first official acknowledgment that operational F-35s have entered military inventories lacking one of the aircraft’s most important combat systems.

The issue emerged during questioning by Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, a former naval aviator and astronaut, who pressed military officials about persistent concerns surrounding F-35 readiness rates.

Kelly referenced a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that found the average full mission capable (FMC) rate across all F-35 variants had declined significantly, falling from 38 percent in Fiscal Year 2020 to just 25 percent in Fiscal Year 2025. Full mission capable status refers to aircraft that are able to perform all assigned combat missions.

Although the Joint Program Office disputes the methodology used by the GAO to calculate readiness, Kelly highlighted the discrepancy between government oversight figures and military assessments.

During the exchange, Kelly noted that many aircraft remain unavailable for missions and then raised reports that the Marine Corps had accepted fighters without radar systems.

“We have accepted six aircraft for the Marine Corps that do not have a radar installed,” Masiello confirmed.

When Kelly asked whether the situation was caused by a shortage of AN/APG-85 radars, Masiello answered affirmatively.

The aircraft are widely believed to be F-35B short takeoff and vertical landing variants, although Masiello did not explicitly identify the variant during the hearing. The Marine Corps is currently the only U.S. military branch that operates the F-35B, though it also flies the carrier-capable F-35C.

The radar shortage stems directly from delays affecting the AN/APG-85, a next-generation active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar being developed by Northrop Grumman.

The AN/APG-85 represents one of the most important components of the broader Block 4 modernization package, a sweeping upgrade initiative intended to keep the F-35 competitive against evolving threats well into the coming decades.

Military officials describe Block 4 as essential for maintaining air superiority against increasingly capable adversaries. The modernization effort encompasses new sensors, enhanced electronic warfare systems, improved computing power, expanded weapons integration, and advanced networking capabilities.

However, the program has suffered repeated delays and escalating costs.

According to budget documents released earlier this year, the first production AN/APG-85 radars are not expected to be delivered until April 2028. While that date actually represents an improvement over previous schedules, it remains years later than originally envisioned.

The delay has created an unusual situation in which newly manufactured aircraft are rolling off production lines before critical systems designed for them are ready.

Military officials have defended the decision to continue production despite incomplete modernization components.

According to Marine Corps representatives, the Department of Defense deliberately chose a highly concurrent approach in which aircraft production and technology development proceed simultaneously. Officials argue that producing aircraft configured to eventually receive Block 4 upgrades is preferable to continuing construction of older Block 3 configurations that would later require extensive and costly retrofits.

The strategy, however, comes with clear risks, including the current reality of delivering combat aircraft lacking radar systems.

The radar is one of the most important systems aboard any modern fighter aircraft, and its absence significantly affects operational capability.

Current F-35 variants rely on the AN/APG-81 AESA radar, which provides air-to-air tracking, air-to-ground targeting, synthetic aperture radar mapping, reconnaissance functions, and electronic warfare capabilities.

Developed using technologies originating in the 1990s, the AN/APG-81 remains highly capable and has been combat proven. Nevertheless, military planners view the AN/APG-85 as necessary to counter future threats.

Although details remain classified, the new radar is expected to offer substantial improvements in detection range, processing power, target tracking, electronic attack capabilities, and resistance to enemy countermeasures.

Industry observers also believe the system incorporates newer gallium nitride semiconductor technologies that enable greater performance while improving efficiency and thermal management.

The AN/APG-85 is expected to function not merely as a radar but as an integrated sensor node deeply connected with the aircraft’s electronic warfare systems, communications architecture, and mission computers.

As a result, delays affecting the radar could have cascading effects across multiple Block 4 capabilities.

The acceptance of radarless F-35s raises significant questions about how the aircraft will be used until replacement systems become available.

During the hearing, Senator Kelly openly questioned whether aircraft lacking radars could be considered fully mission capable.

“I don’t think I would count them as fully mission capable,” Masiello admitted.

Kelly responded by saying he could not imagine circumstances in which an F-35 without a radar could qualify as fully mission capable, a point Masiello did not contest.

Despite lacking radars, the aircraft are not completely unusable.

The F-35 was designed around extensive sensor fusion and networking capabilities. Through the Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL), aircraft can share information among formations in real time.

In practice, this means radar-equipped F-35s can provide targeting and situational awareness information to aircraft operating without their own radar systems.

Additionally, pilots retain access to information from passive sensors, including infrared search systems, electronic support measures, and external data provided through Link 16 networks.

However, significant limitations remain.

Aircraft without radars must depend heavily on nearby aircraft or external platforms for targeting information. This dependence reduces tactical flexibility and may increase operational risk during high-threat missions.

The absence of radar capability also diminishes the aircraft’s ability to independently detect, identify, and engage threats.

Perhaps more importantly, the radar plays a crucial role in the F-35’s electronic warfare architecture.

Modern AESA radars can perform electronic attack functions by transmitting highly focused energy beams to disrupt or deceive enemy sensors. Without a radar, an F-35 loses a substantial portion of its electronic warfare capability, reducing its ability to protect itself and other friendly forces operating nearby.

The AN/APG-85 delay is only one aspect of a broader challenge confronting the F-35 program.

During the same Senate hearing, lawmakers explored growing concerns about the aircraft’s power generation and thermal management systems.

The issue centers on whether the F-35 can adequately cool and power all of the advanced technologies planned under Block 4.

According to Senator Kelly, current aircraft generate roughly 30 kilowatts of cooling capacity. Existing Block 4 requirements demand approximately 32 kilowatts, effectively consuming nearly all available capacity.

Masiello acknowledged that future requirements could ultimately reach between 62 and 80 kilowatts.

That leaves little room for growth.

“There’s no margin,” Masiello told lawmakers, explaining that operating complex military systems without reserve capacity is not an ideal long-term strategy.

The Joint Program Office is pursuing incremental improvements while simultaneously studying larger upgrades to the aircraft’s Power and Thermal Management System (PTMS).

Officials anticipate an engine core upgrade around 2031 that will provide modest increases in cooling and electrical generation capability. More comprehensive power and thermal upgrades are expected later.

Although Masiello stated that AN/APG-85 integration would not require those future improvements, questions remain regarding how much capability can be fully utilized before enhanced cooling systems become available.

The discussion highlighted another recurring challenge for the F-35 program: the growing demands imposed by increasingly sophisticated onboard systems.

As sensors, computing power, electronic warfare capabilities, and networking technologies evolve, the aircraft’s infrastructure must continually expand to support them.

The radar delay is part of a broader pattern affecting Block 4 modernization.

According to the Government Accountability Office, portions of the program remain approximately five years behind schedule.

The original vision called for aircraft equipped with the full Block 4 capability package to begin entering service around this period. Instead, key elements continue to face development and integration challenges.

Beyond the AN/APG-85 radar, Block 4 includes plans for upgraded versions of the F-35’s Distributed Aperture System (DAS) and Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS), along with a completely new electronic warfare suite.

The modernization package will also support additional weapons, expanded sensor capabilities, enhanced data processing, and improved networking functions.

Military officials consistently describe the electronic warfare upgrades as among the most important components of the program, particularly given increasingly sophisticated air defense systems being fielded around the world.

Many of these future capabilities depend upon successful integration of the AN/APG-85 and supporting infrastructure upgrades.

Consequently, radar delays threaten to influence multiple areas of the modernization roadmap.

The radar issue emerges against a backdrop of broader concerns about fleet readiness.

The F-35 program continues to struggle with maintenance demands, sustainment costs, and spare parts availability.

Masiello acknowledged before lawmakers that inventory shortages have become a significant contributor to readiness problems.

According to the JPO director, the issue is less about flaws within the aircraft itself and more about insufficient investment in spare parts inventories as fleet size expanded rapidly.

The number of operational F-35s has grown substantially across the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and international partner nations. However, logistics systems have not always kept pace with increasing demand.

Officials now hope future budget increases will help replenish inventories and improve aircraft availability.

Nevertheless, readiness remains a central concern for policymakers overseeing a program expected to remain in service through the 2070s.

The F-35 remains the largest and most expensive military aviation program in history.

As of last year, total lifecycle costs were estimated at approximately $2.1 trillion, covering development, procurement, operations, maintenance, and modernization throughout the aircraft’s projected service life.

Program officials emphasize that the figure encompasses thousands of aircraft and decades of operations, with inflation accounting for a significant portion of the projected expense.

Even so, lawmakers continue to scrutinize costs, schedules, and readiness performance.

The revelation that radarless aircraft are now entering military service is likely to intensify that scrutiny.

While defense officials maintain that the decision was a calculated and deliberate risk intended to accelerate future modernization, critics may view the development as evidence of a program increasingly strained by technical complexity and ambitious requirements.

For now, at least six Marine Corps F-35s are flying without the radar systems they were designed to carry. With production AN/APG-85 radars not expected until 2028, and broader Block 4 upgrades still facing delays, the unusual situation may persist for years.

The development illustrates both the extraordinary ambition of the F-35 program and the significant challenges involved in continually evolving a fifth-generation fighter to meet future battlefield demands.

The Philippine Army is undertaking a significant reassessment of its armored warfare roadmap, a process that is increasingly expanding beyond platform selection into wider questions of supply chain resilience, alliance diversification, and long-term combat readiness amid intensifying Indo-Pacific security competition.

What initially began as a focused modernization effort centered on the Israeli-made Sabrah light tank has evolved into a more complex strategic debate within the defense establishment, highlighting how geopolitical disruptions and shifting export priorities can reshape procurement trajectories for mid-sized militaries operating in contested regions.

At the center of the reassessment is the Philippine Army’s experience with the Light Tank Acquisition Project under the Armed Forces of the Philippines Modernization Program Horizon 2 initiative. The program awarded a contract to Israel’s Elbit Systems valued at approximately US$172 million, intended to establish a foundational armored capability for the country’s evolving force structure.

The acquisition package was designed as an integrated ecosystem rather than a standalone vehicle purchase. It included 18 tracked Sabrah light tanks based on the ASCOD 2, one armored recovery vehicle, one command vehicle, ten Pandur II fire support vehicles, two armored personnel carriers, three tank transporters, and five sniper detection systems.

The Sabrah system itself, developed by Elbit Systems specifically for Philippine requirements, was intended to provide mobile direct-fire support through a 105mm cannon mounted on either tracked or wheeled platforms. The tracked variant uses the ASCOD 2 chassis, while the wheeled configuration is based on the Pandur II 8×8, offering flexibility across the archipelago’s diverse terrain and infrastructure constraints.

The Philippines became the launch customer for the Sabrah configuration, introducing additional developmental and integration complexity into the delivery schedule. The original plan envisioned a three-year induction timeline beginning in the early phase of the Horizon 2 modernization period, with the aim of rapidly fielding a modern armored capability for combined-arms operations.

Initial deliveries began in late 2022 and continued into 2023, and by early 2024 approximately nine tracked Sabrah units had reportedly entered service. These vehicles participated in live-fire exercises and were subsequently integrated into training cycles, signaling early progress in force generation.

However, by 2026 the broader acquisition package remained incomplete, with delivery delays becoming a central issue in Philippine Army planning discussions. Defense officials increasingly describe the challenge not as a platform performance concern but as a sustainment and predictability problem—an important distinction given that the Sabrah systems already in service have not exhibited publicly reported technical deficiencies.

Indeed, operational reporting indicates that delivered units have successfully completed live-fire training and participated in major exercises, including Balikatan 2026. These activities suggest that integration into Philippine force structures has proceeded effectively at the tactical level.

The emerging concern instead centers on strategic sequencing. Armored force development requires synchronized induction of vehicles, logistics systems, maintenance training, and command integration. When delivery schedules become uncertain, the resulting disruption extends beyond equipment counts and begins to affect doctrinal development, readiness cycles, and long-term force design assumptions.

Within the Philippine Army—part of the Armed Forces of the Philippines—planners have increasingly emphasized that armored capability is not merely a function of platform availability but of industrial reliability. Predictable sustainment pipelines are essential for maintaining training continuity and ensuring operational readiness.

The delay issue has been widely linked in defense discussions to broader industrial constraints affecting Israeli defense production following heightened regional security demands after 2023. Reports suggest that domestic prioritization requirements have placed pressure on export commitments, with companies such as Elbit Systems reallocating production capacity toward national defense needs.

In parallel, global supply chain dependencies involving European subcomponents—particularly within the ASCOD 2 production ecosystem—are understood to have added further friction to production timelines. The cumulative effect has been a slowdown in delivery consistency, rather than a breakdown in platform capability.

For Manila, this has created a strategic planning challenge. Modernization programs such as Horizon 2 are structured around phased capability development, where armored units are introduced in synchronized waves to support doctrine formation and force integration. When deliveries become unpredictable, the risk is not simply delay but distortion of force development logic itself.

This has led to growing internal discussion about supplier diversification and procurement resilience. Defense analysts note that reliance on a single external supplier, even a technologically capable one, introduces systemic vulnerability during periods of geopolitical stress or industrial reprioritization.

As a result, the Philippine defense establishment has reportedly begun evaluating alternative armored platforms, including Japan’s Type 10 Main Battle Tank and the Type 16 Maneuver Combat Vehicle. These assessments are understood to be exploratory but strategically significant, reflecting a potential shift in procurement philosophy rather than a simple equipment replacement decision.

The Type 10 MBT represents a notably different design philosophy from the Sabrah. While the Sabrah is classified as a light tank optimized for mobility and expeditionary fire support, the Type 10 is a full main battle tank incorporating advanced armor systems, a 120mm smoothbore gun, and an autoloader enabling a reduced crew configuration.

Weighing approximately 44–48 tonnes, the Type 10 is lighter than many Western main battle tanks, a design choice driven by Japan’s infrastructure constraints. Its modular armor and advanced networked systems are intended to balance protection, mobility, and deployability across complex terrain environments.

These characteristics have attracted attention within Philippine defense circles, particularly given the country’s archipelagic geography. The Philippines’ operational environment requires armored platforms capable not only of battlefield maneuver but also inter-island transport, road network compatibility, and rapid redeployment across dispersed theaters.

Under the Philippine military’s evolving Comprehensive Archipelagic Defense Concept, mobility and distribution are increasingly prioritized alongside firepower. This doctrinal shift emphasizes the ability to reposition forces quickly across islands, complicating adversary targeting and enhancing operational flexibility.

In this context, lighter and more mobile armored systems such as the Type 10 and Type 16 may offer conceptual alignment with Philippine operational requirements, despite their higher procurement complexity and cost. Reported unit costs for the Type 10 range between ¥700 million and ¥1 billion, excluding long-term sustainment infrastructure.

Such infrastructure considerations are significant. Introducing a new main battle tank platform would require new ammunition logistics, maintenance training pipelines, recovery systems, and transport adaptations—potentially representing a long-term ecosystem commitment rather than a simple fleet expansion.

At the same time, defense cooperation between Japan and the Philippines has strengthened in recent years, with expanded security engagement and interoperability initiatives. Exercises such as Balikatan 2026 have also contributed to greater operational familiarity among regional partners, reinforcing broader alignment trends.

For policymakers in Manila, the evolving armored procurement debate therefore extends beyond technical specifications. It increasingly reflects a strategic calculation involving industrial reliability, alliance diversification, and long-term sustainment assurance.

The Sabrah experience has underscored a broader lesson shared by many middle powers: platform capability alone is insufficient if delivery timelines and sustainment chains are exposed to external shocks. As a result, procurement strategies are increasingly incorporating geopolitical risk assessments alongside traditional performance metrics.

Within this framework, armored modernization is no longer simply a question of selecting the most capable vehicle. It has become a multidimensional decision space where mobility, industrial resilience, alliance compatibility, and supply chain stability are weighted alongside firepower and protection.

United States President Donald Trump has delayed the introduction of steeper US tariffs on selected imported furniture products for one year, issuing the order just hours before the higher duties were due to take effect on Thursday, January 1. The move temporarily spares consumers and retailers from sharp price increases while reopening space for negotiations with key trading partners.

The delayed tariffs were part of a broader package of sector-specific trade measures revived by Trump since his return to the White House. Under the original plan, duties were set to rise to 30 per cent on certain upholstered furniture and 50 per cent on kitchen cabinets and vanities, significantly increasing costs across the US home furnishings market.

Late on Wednesday, Trump signed an order postponing the tariff hike until January 1, 2027, citing ongoing negotiations over imported wood products. In a statement announcing the decision, the White House said the delay was intended to allow additional time for talks with other countries.

“Given the ongoing productive negotiations regarding the imports of wood products, the President is delaying the tariff increase to allow for further negotiations to occur with other countries,” the statement said.

The decision comes as US households continue to face elevated living costs, with housing, renovation, and household goods remaining particularly sensitive sectors. Industry groups had warned that the planned tariff increases would almost certainly be passed on to consumers, further straining household budgets and dampening demand in an already slowing housing market.

The furniture industry has been directly affected by Trump’s broader trade agenda in 2025, which has seen a renewed push for tariffs across a wide range of sectors. Since returning to office, Trump has imposed duties on goods ranging from steel and aluminum to automobiles, framing the measures as essential to protecting domestic manufacturing and national security.

In October, the administration implemented a 10 per cent tariff on imported softwood timber and lumber, alongside a 25 per cent duty on certain upholstered furniture and kitchen cabinets. Those measures remain in place and continue to affect imports entering the US market.

The higher tariff rates that were set to begin this week would have hit imports from major suppliers such as Vietnam and China, both of which play a critical role in meeting US demand for affordable furniture. Together, the two countries account for a large share of US furniture imports, particularly in categories such as upholstered seating, cabinetry, and household storage products.

US retailers and importers have argued that domestic production cannot currently meet demand at competitive prices, warning that abrupt tariff hikes risk supply disruptions, store closures, and job losses in downstream sectors such as logistics and retail.

While the delay offers short-term relief, uncertainty remains high. The Trump administration has signaled that additional trade investigations are underway, raising the possibility of new levies in other sectors in the coming months.

Adding to the legal uncertainty, the US Supreme Court is expected to rule on the legality of countrywide tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The case could have far-reaching implications for the administration’s authority to impose broad trade restrictions without congressional approval.

For now, the postponement underscores the balancing act facing the White House as it seeks to advance a protectionist trade agenda while navigating inflation concerns, legal scrutiny, and the economic realities confronting American consumers.

The delayed tariffs will be reviewed again ahead of their new implementation date in 2027, leaving businesses, suppliers, and trading partners watching closely for the administration’s next move.

The UK government has criticised delays in aid being allowed into Gaza after a consignment of more than 1,100 tents it sent to the strip took more than a year to arrive.

The foreign secretary has also raised concerns that other UK-funded aid had been unable to reach residents, despite the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel.

Yvette Cooper said the situation in Gaza remains “dire” as the United Nations warned that 1.5 million people are in need of urgent shelter amid worsening rains and plummeting temperatures ahead of winter.

The BBC has asked the Israeli government for a response.

The tents – each capable of housing a family of five – reached Gaza on Monday, with more expected to arrive this week.

Government sources said the tents will provide shelter to as many as 12,000 people over the winter months.

Cooper said the delay in getting aid into the strip could not be allowed to continue and that all crossings into the territory should be opened to allow unhindered humanitarian access.

She said: “The situation in Gaza remains dire, with worsening weather conditions compounding the critical issues caused by damaged infrastructure and over two years of conflict.

“Parents have been trying to shelter their children under broken roofs and open skies.

“These tents will provide a lifeline to thousands of people needing shelter, protecting them from the cold winds and relentless rain turning rubble into mud.”

About 1.9 million people in Gaza, nearly 90% of the population, have been displaced since the Israel-Hamas conflict began in October 2023, according to the UN.

Cooper said the arrival of the aid was welcome but only a step towards the major reconstruction that is “badly needed” and she was frustrated to see “yet another consignment of aid stuck at the border” earlier this year.

“This cannot be allowed to continue,” she said.

“The arrival of these tents shows the scale of potential impact when our aid gets in, and we will continue to do all we can to urge unhindered humanitarian access, the opening of all the crossings, the implementation of the peace plan, and a path to peace.”

Unicef Special Representative to the State of Palestine Jonathan Veitch said the arrival of the tents “represents months of ongoing work by the international community to push for greater aid access”.

“The situation in Gaza is devastating as cold, and heavy rains continue to affect families living in extremely difficult conditions.

“Even with the ceasefire, daily life remains incredibly challenging for children in the Gaza Strip.

“UK aid–supported tents have now entered Gaza and will provide urgently needed shelter to help families face the harsh winter. Much more is needed.”

In a striking development that underscores deepening geopolitical rifts, Turkey appears to have obstructed the delivery of the Indian Army’s second and final batch of six AH-64E Apache attack helicopters. Ordered from the United States in 2020, the aircraft were en route to India when their transport was suddenly halted—an interruption that sources attribute to Ankara’s refusal to grant overflight clearance.

The heavy-lift An-124 Ruslan cargo plane, serial number UR-82008, operated by the Ukrainian company Antonov Airlines, began its journey on October 30 from Leipzig, Germany, heading to Mesa Gateway Airport in Arizona, where Boeing manufactures the AH-64E. According to multiple plane spotters, including the aviation tracker @KiwaSpotter, the aircraft was seen loading three Indian Army–painted Apaches—distinct with their sand-gray camouflage and Indian insignia.

The cargo plane departed Mesa Gateway on November 1, landing at East Midlands Airport in England after a transatlantic flight. Curiously, it remained grounded there for eight days, raising questions among aviation enthusiasts and defense analysts monitoring the flight path.

Then, on November 8, the An-124—rather than proceeding eastward toward India—reversed course. It flew back across the Atlantic to Arizona, returning to Mesa Gateway Airport. Photographs that surfaced on defense forums and social media showed the Apaches being unloaded from the aircraft and towed away by Ford F-250 trucks on the tarmac.

Officially, Boeing attributed the unexpected detour to “logistical issues.” However, an informed defense source quoted by the EurAsian Times revealed a more troubling explanation: Turkey had denied airspace clearance for the cargo flight because it carried Indian military hardware.

“The An-124 was stuck in England for a week because Turkey refused to grant overflight permission,” said the source, requesting anonymity. “This decision was influenced by the current state of relations between India and Turkey.”

That “state of relations” has sharply deteriorated in recent months. India-Turkey ties, already strained since 2019 over President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s repeated remarks on Kashmir, hit a new low during the May 2025 four-day war between India and Pakistan.

During the conflict—triggered by India’s Operation Sindoor, a retaliatory air and ground offensive following the Pahalgam terror attack—Turkey took a decisively pro-Pakistan stance. Ankara not only condemned India’s strikes but also supplied Islamabad with military aid, including reconnaissance drones and electronic warfare components.

Turkey’s open diplomatic, military, and media backing of Pakistan sparked outrage in New Delhi. Indian authorities responded swiftly: several Turkish media accounts on X (formerly Twitter) were blocked for allegedly spreading misinformation, and the government revoked security clearance for Celebi Airport Services, a Turkish company operating at multiple Indian airports.

Though some of these restrictions were later eased, the damage was lasting. Indian trade associations called for a boycott of Turkish goods and tourism, significantly reducing the flow of Indian travelers to Istanbul and Antalya. The suspension of direct charter services followed, underscoring a collapse in people-to-people contact.

Turkey’s alignment with Pakistan is long-standing, rooted in religious and strategic affinities. Erdoğan has consistently voiced support for Islamabad on the Kashmir dispute, describing it as a “threat to peace” in speeches at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) since 2019.

While New Delhi had previously brushed aside such rhetoric, Turkey’s material support during an armed conflict was viewed as an unforgivable escalation. “It’s one thing to talk about Kashmir,” said a retired Indian diplomat. “It’s another to actively back Pakistan’s military logistics during hostilities. That crossed a red line.”

In response, India has deepened defense and diplomatic engagement with Turkey’s regional rivals—Greece, Cyprus, and Armenia—a strategic realignment evident in the expanding trilateral cooperation between New Delhi, Athens, and Nicosia.

The latest airspace denial appears to be Ankara’s attempt at quiet retaliation. Turkey controls one of the most strategically significant aviation corridors between Europe and Asia. Any heavy cargo flight from Western Europe to South Asia—particularly those carrying sensitive defense materials—typically requires Turkish clearance.

“The denial of overflight to an Antonov carrying Indian military assets is unprecedented,” said an analyst at Janes Defence Weekly. “It signals that Ankara is willing to leverage its geographic position to exert political pressure.”

For India, the timing could not be worse. The Indian Army’s AH-64E procurement has already suffered repeated delays due to global supply chain disruptions. The first batch of six helicopters, initially scheduled for delivery in mid-2024, finally arrived in July 2025. The second and final batch was slated for November 2025, completing the Army’s $600 million order signed in 2020.

Now, with the cargo turned back, that schedule appears uncertain.

India’s experience with the Apache platform dates back to 2019 when the Indian Air Force (IAF) inducted 22 AH-64Es ordered under a 2015 deal worth $2.1 billion. These aircraft were deployed at Pathankot Air Force Station near the Pakistan border and at Jorhat in Assam, covering the eastern front with China.

The Indian Army, seeking its own attack aviation capability independent of the IAF, placed a follow-on order for six additional helicopters. Defense Minister Rajnath Singh hailed the first Army batch earlier this year as a “game changer” that would “enhance the Army Aviation Wing’s operational effectiveness in high-altitude and complex terrains.”

The AH-64E Apache Guardian—often dubbed “tanks in the air”—is the world’s most advanced multi-role attack helicopter. Built by Boeing, it integrates cutting-edge avionics and weapons systems, making it capable of both offensive and reconnaissance missions.

• Twin GE T700-701D engines for greater power and altitude performance.
• AN/APG-78 Longbow radar, capable of tracking 128 targets and engaging 16 simultaneously.
• Lockheed Martin Arrowhead FLIR (Forward-Looking Infrared) for day/night and all-weather target acquisition.
• AGM-114R Hellfire missiles, 70mm rockets, and a 30mm M230 chain gun for precision ground attacks.

These capabilities make the Apache ideal for India’s dual-front contingencies—anti-armor operations against Pakistan and mountain warfare along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China. The helicopter’s Manned-Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) system allows it to operate in coordination with surveillance drones, an advantage in high-altitude conflict zones where visibility and reaction time are critical.

The delivery delay, while logistical on the surface, has deeper strategic resonance. It highlights how diplomatic tensions can intersect with defense supply chains, even when the primary supplier—Boeing—is American.

“Turkey’s move shows the vulnerabilities in India’s global defense logistics,” said a retired Indian Air Marshal. “When critical assets are transported through multiple jurisdictions, politics can easily become a factor.”

India has traditionally relied on Antonov heavy cargo aircraft for long-range transport of oversized military equipment, particularly from the U.S. and Europe. However, with the ongoing war in Ukraine and strained NATO logistics, alternative routes are limited.

If Turkey maintains its stance, India may have to explore alternate air routes via Central Asia or the Middle East, potentially through Greece, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia—though each adds distance, cost, and complexity.

The incident comes amid a broader reconfiguration of defense alliances. Ankara’s increasingly assertive diplomacy—from its role in the South Caucasus to its deepening cooperation with Beijing and Islamabad—has set it on a collision course with India’s Indo-Pacific ambitions.

Meanwhile, New Delhi’s engagement with Greece, France, and the UAE has deepened, with joint exercises and defense deals emphasizing shared security in the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean.

Analysts believe the Apache incident could accelerate India’s pivot away from Turkish routes and suppliers. “It will likely push New Delhi to diversify transport logistics and build redundancy into critical military deliveries,” observed an Indian defense scholar at Jawaharlal Nehru University.

For now, Boeing maintains that the issue is “temporary” and that it is “working with partners to ensure timely delivery.” However, with Ankara’s position uncertain and no official word from the Turkish Directorate General of Civil Aviation, the timeline for the Indian Army’s Apache induction remains in limbo.

PA

Iran is reportedly evaluating the acquisition of the Chinese-built J-10C “Vigorous Dragon,” a 4.5-generation multirole fighter jet that has recently surged into the international spotlight. Nicknamed the “Rafale Killer” by regional analysts after its alleged battlefield successes, the J-10C could mark a dramatic shift in the Islamic Republic’s aerial strategy amid ongoing geopolitical turbulence and military pressure.

This growing interest comes on the heels of unverified yet widely circulated reports claiming that Pakistan’s J-10C fighters—equipped with the powerful PL-15E beyond-visual-range (BVR) missile—shot down three Indian Rafale jets during a four-day aerial skirmish last month. While New Delhi has officially denied the losses, the incident has nonetheless elevated the J-10C’s profile on the global stage and sparked intense debate within military aviation circles.

Now, Iran’s reported consideration of this Chinese fighter could reshape the regional aerial balance in profound ways.

The speculation surrounding Iran’s potential acquisition gained traction following Iranian Defence Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh’s visit to Qingdao, China, for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit. The SCO—co-founded by China and Russia—has long served as a platform for strategic coordination across Eurasia. It includes not only Iran and China, but also military powers such as India, Pakistan, Russia, and several Central Asian republics.

While the summit focused publicly on regional cooperation, the private sidelines of such events often serve as fertile ground for defence diplomacy. Nasirzadeh’s meetings reportedly included high-level Chinese defence representatives and aerospace executives. Sources close to Iran’s defence procurement apparatus suggest that preliminary discussions over the J-10C’s pricing, delivery timeline, and technology transfer provisions may have taken place behind closed doors.

Iran’s pivot toward the J-10C stems, in part, from mounting dissatisfaction with the status of its Su-35 acquisition deal with Russia. Originally intended for Egypt, the Su-35 “Flanker-E” fighters were diverted to Iran after Cairo backed out under pressure from the United States through the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).

In late 2023, Iranian state-affiliated media, including Tasnim News, announced that a deal for several dozen Su-35s had been finalized. The aircraft—equipped with the powerful Irbis-E radar and supermaneuverable AL-41F1S engines—was hailed as the future backbone of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF). But over a year later, none have arrived.

Moscow’s repeated delays have frustrated Iranian officials. The situation has been further complicated by Iran’s growing military involvement in the Ukraine war, where Iranian drones and, more recently, ballistic missiles have been deployed in support of Russian operations. While Russia has offered these aircraft in exchange for Iran’s support, geopolitical complications and logistics bottlenecks have stalled deliveries indefinitely.

This delay has forced Iran to reassess its procurement pipeline—and the J-10C has emerged as a compelling alternative.

Developed by Chengdu Aircraft Corporation, the J-10C is the most advanced variant of the J-10 family and has seen considerable upgrades in avionics, sensors, and propulsion. Unlike its earlier counterparts, the “C” model incorporates an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, digital fly-by-wire systems, and a Chinese-made WS-10B turbofan engine.

The J-10C’s design is based on a canard-delta configuration, allowing for enhanced agility and short takeoff distances—key features in Iran’s mountainous operational environment. But what truly sets the jet apart is its compatibility with the PL-15E missile.

The PL-15E is China’s export version of its next-generation BVR missile, co-developed with Russian input and reportedly designed to outperform the American AIM-120D. With an estimated range of 145 km (for the export variant), and equipped with an advanced AESA seeker and datalink capabilities, the missile significantly enhances the J-10C’s lethality in first-shot/first-kill engagements.

The recent and still unconfirmed air confrontation between India and Pakistan has put the J-10C into a new light. Pakistani media, citing military sources, claim that PAF J-10Cs successfully downed three Indian Rafales, a Su-30MKI, a Mirage 2000, and a MiG-29 during a four-day border flare-up earlier this year. If true, these events would constitute the most devastating blow to India’s frontline fighter fleet in recent history—and would serve as a major propaganda victory for Chinese-made air platforms.

India has categorically denied these losses, while international observers remain cautious due to a lack of independent verification. However, the perception of battlefield success—especially in the Global South—has had a profound impact. At the 2025 Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace Exhibition (LIMA) in Malaysia, the J-10CE (the export variant of the J-10C) was one of the event’s biggest attractions.

Chinese media outlets, including the Global Times, reported that the fighter jet attracted widespread attention from military delegations across Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. “Pesawat pejuang J-10CE… menjadi tumpuan utama,” the Global Times wrote, noting the intense interest in the platform following its alleged combat record.

Iran’s air force currently relies on a patchwork of outdated aircraft, including the U.S.-built F-4 Phantom II and F-14 Tomcat, and the Russian MiG-29—many of which are over 40 years old. Despite extensive maintenance and periodic upgrades, these platforms offer limited capability in modern, networked warfare environments.

The acquisition of the J-10C would not only represent a generational leap in Iran’s air combat capabilities, but also diversify its defence partnerships beyond Moscow. This is critical given the increasing unpredictability of Russian deliveries and Iran’s rising tensions with the West.

Additionally, Beijing is less encumbered by geopolitical red lines than Russia. Unlike Moscow, which has to contend with Western sanctions over Ukraine and manage relationships with Israel and Saudi Arabia, China operates with a more flexible diplomacy matrix. This makes it easier for Iran to procure advanced systems through Chinese suppliers without attracting immediate retaliation or delays.

Should Iran proceed with a purchase of the J-10C, it would significantly alter the aerial balance of power in the Middle East. Israeli and Saudi defence planners, who have long counted on Iran’s limited ability to conduct offensive air operations, would have to revise their assessments.

The J-10C, especially when equipped with PL-15Es, would enable Iran to project credible air superiority in contested areas like the Strait of Hormuz or Iraq-Syria air corridors. This could also embolden Tehran to take more assertive stances in its regional operations—particularly in supporting Hezbollah, the Houthis, and its network of Shia militias across the region.

Additionally, Iran’s move could spark an arms race in the Gulf. Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which are already modernizing their fleets with F-15EXs and Rafales, may seek even more advanced systems—potentially fifth-generation platforms like the F-35, or even new systems under development like the British-led GCAP or the American NGAD.

Israel, which operates F-35I “Adir” stealth fighters, may respond by expanding its procurement or deepening its air defence integration with regional allies such as Jordan, Greece, or even Saudi Arabia under the Abraham Accords framework.

For China, the potential sale to Iran would represent more than just a commercial success—it would be a strategic statement. The global arms market has traditionally been dominated by the United States, Russia, and France. But with the J-10C, the FC-31 stealth fighter, and the J-20A entering export-ready phases, China is positioning itself as a major player in the military aviation space.

The J-10C’s export to Pakistan and potentially Iran strengthens Beijing’s geopolitical hand in both South Asia and the Middle East, regions where the U.S. has historically maintained dominance. It also furthers China’s Belt and Road ambitions by creating dependencies through defence and dual-use technologies.

By equipping Iran with a frontline multirole fighter, China can effectively create another foothold in the Gulf—pressuring U.S. naval dominance and complicating Israeli air superiority.

For Iran, the choice between the Su-35 and the J-10C is emblematic of a broader shift in its strategic alignment. While Russia has long been a defence partner of necessity, China offers a more scalable, flexible, and potentially less politically entangled relationship.

Iran’s decision will ultimately depend on several factors: technology transfer terms, delivery timelines, cost, and the geopolitical calculus of aligning more deeply with China versus remaining dependent on Russian systems.

But one thing is becoming increasingly clear—Tehran is no longer willing to wait in the shadow of failed promises and delayed deliveries. If current trends hold, the “Rafale Killer” may soon be flying in the colours of the IRIAF, redefining what Iranian airpower looks like in the second quarter.

As regional powers watch closely and military analysts parse satellite images and procurement statements, the J-10C’s future in Iran remains undecided—but no longer implausible. For a nation long burdened by sanctions and technological constraints, this could be a transformative moment—one that reorients not only its air force but also its place in the shifting dynamics of Middle East geopolitics.

ROME: Jannik Sinner marched into the semifinals of the Italian Open on Wednesday after destroying Casper Ruud in straight sets 6-0, 6-1 and sending a warning that the world number one is officially back.

Ruud was supposed to be Sinner’s toughest test in Rome since he came back from his three-month doping ban, as the Norwegian came into the match in hot form on clay after winning in Madrid earlier this month.

In his previous matches Sinner looked to be still finding his feet after his suspension, accepted from the World Anti-Doping Agency for testing positive for traces of clostebol in March last year.

But the 23-year-old demolished sixth seed Ruud in just over an hour with an ominous display of tennis, his domination such that the home fans at the packed center court, seemingly out of sympathy, began to cheer the rare points that Ruud won.

Ruud even got the loudest cheer of the match when he held his serve for the only time, in game three of the second set, holding his arms aloft in ironic celebration.

“I was feeling great on court today. I think we all saw that,” said Sinner.

“How I felt today was very, very positive signs for me… I was serving well and also returning well. Moving great on the court, so I’m very happy about that.”

Tommy Paul, a 7-6 (7/4), 6-3 winner over Hubert Hurkacz in the day’s first match, will have wondered what on earth he can do to stop Sinner if the Italian brings that form to Friday’s last-four clash.

Sinner won the first set in just 27 minutes, giving up only seven points as he stalked the court with intent, dressed all in black as he has been all week.

And he then maintained his record of not dropping a set in the tournament to not so much stroll as smash into the last four, and send a message to Carlos Alcaraz.

Spaniard Alcaraz, Sinner’s key Grand Slam rival ahead of the French Open, will contest the other semifinal with Lorenzo Musetti on Friday afternoon, with the blockbuster final tennis fans wanted still on.

Home hope and sixth seed Paolini became the third Italian woman to reach the Foro Italico final, and the first since her doubles partner Sara Errani was thumped by Serena Williams in 2014.

Late bloomer Paolini, 29, will face one of Coco Gauff and China’s Zheng Qinwen, who beat world number one Aryna Sabalenka on Wednesday night, after beating Peyton Stearns 7-5, 6-1.

“It’s a privilege to be in this position. I matured late as a tennis player but everyone has their own path. Some mature earlier and some later,” said Paolini.

“I’m just enjoying it without thinking too much about the past.”

Paolini was favorite to get past unseeded Stearns but early on her American opponent showed why she got to her first 1000 series semifinal by knocking out a succession of big names including Naomi Osaka and fifth seed Madison Keys.

Paolini looked way off the pace when she lost the first three games of the match in surprisingly timid fashion, serving weakly and mishitting a host of simple shots.

But she slowly began to force herself back into the contest, putting pressure on Stearns to find shots with her serving and finding both more power and accuracy on her forehand.

Stearns’ frustration was clear to see after being broken to allow Paolini to serve for the set, lashing her racket into her bag before giving herself a telling off in her seat.

And a break of serve in the third game of the second set deflated Stearns, whose fate was sealed two games later when Paolini took the third of three break points, roaring her joy to her delighted supporters in the center court stands before comfortably seeing out the match.

Paolini could yet win both the singles and women’s doubles tournaments, with her and Errani taking on Mirra Andreeva and Diana Shnaider in the semifinals on Friday.

Getty Images

Reuters

Reuters

Reuters

Reuters

Shutterstock

Reuters