Since time immemorial, NATO leaders have turned a blind eye to Turkey which role as a member state is considered crucial as it boasts the second largest military in the alliance, situated in the very geographical area in the Middle East, adjacent to three continents and being in control of the Turkish Straits. Therefore, it has long been regarded as an indispensable part of NATO.
However, is that true?
In essence, due to its proximity to this fragile region, NATO constitutes a crucial anchor providing a security guarantee for Turkey in order to maintain its stability, sovereignty and wellbeing while ensuring peace throughout Middle East. Hence, Turkish Armed Forces have been deeply integrated with NATO, as regards its military, political and technical perspectives. Additionally, almost all Turkish assets having been amalgamated with NATO, whether made indigenously or exported, are manufactured according to the alliance’s own standards containing specific components imported from other Western Allies.
Moreover, maintenance and operating procedures along with spare parts, both technical and field manuals, signals, messaging standards which are generated and maintained as such, should require meticulous training as well as expertise, not to mention foreign language acquisition at a proficient level, all of which can be extremely time-consuming. Furthermore, it is common knowledge that the other NATO’s Member States are Turkey’s most important foreign army suppliers.
In a nutshell, Turkey has definitely benefited from its participation as a member state respectively:
- Access to NATO’s Intelligence system (platforms), advanced military technology (AI included) and its logistics support infrastructure
- Participation in joint ally exercises and drills
- Security guarantee by NATO itself
In parallel, Turkey has strategically taken advantage of NATO in terms of seemingly integrating Western values and preparing for accession to the European Union. Thus, NATO is irreplaceable for Turkey as far as its strategic orientations, conceptual, doctrinal and technical integration are concerned, aiming primarily at maintaining its territorial integrity.
Undoubtedly, Turkey has developed an advanced military industry, gaining expertise from joint production and upgrading projects with other NATO member States and partners.
Is this our case?
Turkey, by utilizing its position within the North Atlantic Alliance, is aiming to move from the state of foreign dependency to the one of strategic autonomy. On the other hand, NATO has been so far the only international framework willing to offer assistance in case the allied country is under attack, taking into account the fact that Turkey itself lacks a credible source of alternative military backing.
Whether the prevailing view that NATO and Turkey may be locked in a marriage of convenience is true or not, the issue raised here is that Turkey has adopted an approach of balancing everything so pragmatically in order to maximize their own interests.
Or not?
Turkey has been conducting an independent and interventionist foreign policy for a long time, avoiding making clear-cut distinctions amongst allies, partners and adversaries. Still, it can be claimed that any appeasement policy towards Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has apparently failed.
What about NATO’s own interests then in this turbulent time and era?
Time has come for NATO to illustrate and define the red lines. Turkey has exploited the Alliance. Although it gains a lot from NATO and depends heavily on its strategic shield, it seems that both this Islamic country and its ambitious, revansionist leader do not seem to value the collective defence and prestige of belonging to the most renowned Alliance of the Western World.