Turkey has more immediate and strategic interests than playing make-believe with NATO. The West is playing he loves me-he loves me not with an incipient Kurdistan which is a genuine existential threat to, if not state itself, then certainly the current regime. The EU which spent the better part of the previous decade insulting the Turks, now wants to make nice but Erdogan now see's the EU and NATO as untrustworthy and duplicitous. He seems to be saying 'count me out' of the Empire's machinations.
10
This editorial is incredibly weak when it comes to identifying the main problem in Turkey, which is undoubtedly the shady Islamist character Erdogan.
9
Public opinion polls show that the Turks don’t consider ISIS a primary threat, and Mr. Erdogan is more concerned with opposing Kurdish autonomy within Syria and with bringing down the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad.
----------------------------------------------------------
There is the rub: the Turks do NOT consider ISIL a primary threat any more than Kurdish autonomy within Syria. These polls provide the context for why the Turkish border agents wink and nudge at 'jihadi smugglers' from Turkey into Syria.
As long as the Arab world is organized along tribal or sectarian lines - Sunnis, Shias, Kurds - our tactical alliance with Iran to fight Sunni ISIL cadre is tantamount to fomenting sectarian strife in that region and not conducive to our long-term interests within and without out borders.
Bush or Obama, they all make the same error.
Change we cannot believe in.
----------------------------------------------------------
There is the rub: the Turks do NOT consider ISIL a primary threat any more than Kurdish autonomy within Syria. These polls provide the context for why the Turkish border agents wink and nudge at 'jihadi smugglers' from Turkey into Syria.
As long as the Arab world is organized along tribal or sectarian lines - Sunnis, Shias, Kurds - our tactical alliance with Iran to fight Sunni ISIL cadre is tantamount to fomenting sectarian strife in that region and not conducive to our long-term interests within and without out borders.
Bush or Obama, they all make the same error.
Change we cannot believe in.
5
Turkey has not already been full ally of NATO after cold war.Although Kurdish terorists organization PKK was listed terorist, it freely collect money from NATO countries (even German state agency wrote German State allows PKK to collect money in Germany years ago) in Europe and it has bases that attack from Iraq although Iraq was under total US invasion and control.
Contrary to editorial view, Turkey and Russia are totally different in natural gas policy.Turkey supports TANAP Project that brings Central Asian natural gas to Europe.Turkey will be biggest investor if the Project would be realized.Turkey allowed Russia to use Turkish waters for pipelines , because only Russia accepted to build nuclear plant in Turkey due to US pressure on western countries.
Due to 2 millions Syrians, Turkey is easy target for ISIS to carry out teror.Therefore Turkey is not keen on participation to war against (at least in early phase) ISIS that will not end less than 3 year according to Obama.
Kurdish terorists have killed more than 11.000 Turkish citizens whereas islamic teror cost very few lives in Turkey.It is normal for Turkish public to view PKK more dangerous than ISIS.
Turkey turn to Chinese missile system because Chinese accepted technology transfer.Turkey faced military embargo from US at 1970s and 1990s, that is why Turkey look technology transfer when she buy weapons.
Contrary to editorial view, Turkey and Russia are totally different in natural gas policy.Turkey supports TANAP Project that brings Central Asian natural gas to Europe.Turkey will be biggest investor if the Project would be realized.Turkey allowed Russia to use Turkish waters for pipelines , because only Russia accepted to build nuclear plant in Turkey due to US pressure on western countries.
Due to 2 millions Syrians, Turkey is easy target for ISIS to carry out teror.Therefore Turkey is not keen on participation to war against (at least in early phase) ISIS that will not end less than 3 year according to Obama.
Kurdish terorists have killed more than 11.000 Turkish citizens whereas islamic teror cost very few lives in Turkey.It is normal for Turkish public to view PKK more dangerous than ISIS.
Turkey turn to Chinese missile system because Chinese accepted technology transfer.Turkey faced military embargo from US at 1970s and 1990s, that is why Turkey look technology transfer when she buy weapons.
8
What long term strategic goals does NATO provide to the USA? Europe has the resources to provide for its own defense. The original intent of NATO was to counter the Imperial and expansionist drive of the Soviet Union post WWII when Europe had been drained by that war and was vulnerable. That is no longer the case. Russia has proved incapable of holding any sort of Empire together. It cannot sustain itself when its political structure is dependent on the ego of one individual. We are over extended globally and need to clean up the dysfunction that has hobbled our own government and concentrate on real threats like man induced global warming. NATO makes about as much sense today as the Maginot Line did in the 1930s.
6
Turkey is only interested in Turkey.
NATO is not particularly relevant to Turkish security and arguably, Turkey was always more important to NATO as a forward air / missile base in the containment of the USSR (see G. Kennan; the "X" article among others). Turkey in its most secular days was denied entry into the European Union initially in the late 1990s and has never been admitted. That rejection and its impact on Turkish pride contributed to the election of Erdogan, an ardent Islamist.
Turkey has always been somewhat xenophobic and never hesitated to use repressive violence against minorities living within or adjacent to its borders; eg, the Arenian genocide, the expulsion of Greeks for starters.
In today's day and age of militant Islam, it's far more realistic to think of Turkey as an Islamic state than as a secular, European state. While there are millions of Turks who long for the country to return to the secular days of Ataturk, the reality is that so long as Saudi Arabia continues funding Erdogan, which they have been for a long time, Turkey will continue down it's path to Islamic theocracy.
Quite frankly, Turkey does not need either NATO or the US. They have cast their lot as an unaligned power and we should expect them to play a role similar to that of India during the height of the cold war.
NATO is not particularly relevant to Turkish security and arguably, Turkey was always more important to NATO as a forward air / missile base in the containment of the USSR (see G. Kennan; the "X" article among others). Turkey in its most secular days was denied entry into the European Union initially in the late 1990s and has never been admitted. That rejection and its impact on Turkish pride contributed to the election of Erdogan, an ardent Islamist.
Turkey has always been somewhat xenophobic and never hesitated to use repressive violence against minorities living within or adjacent to its borders; eg, the Arenian genocide, the expulsion of Greeks for starters.
In today's day and age of militant Islam, it's far more realistic to think of Turkey as an Islamic state than as a secular, European state. While there are millions of Turks who long for the country to return to the secular days of Ataturk, the reality is that so long as Saudi Arabia continues funding Erdogan, which they have been for a long time, Turkey will continue down it's path to Islamic theocracy.
Quite frankly, Turkey does not need either NATO or the US. They have cast their lot as an unaligned power and we should expect them to play a role similar to that of India during the height of the cold war.
10
The president of Turkey has a hidden agenda. His ambition is to create the glory of the past Ottoman Empire. He is another Islamic dictator playing games with the West. Turkey is not a reliable ally because it is an Islamic country caught between the West and unstable Muslim world.
4
Completely shutting down the long border may be impossible, but given the country’s large military and well-regarded intelligence service, it is inexcusable that Turkey is not doing a better job.
There are those who say the same thing about the American Government and its border with Mexico.
Shutting down borders? Easier said than done.
There are those who say the same thing about the American Government and its border with Mexico.
Shutting down borders? Easier said than done.
4
one can say that the only reason NATO is still in existence is because the europeans still fear the germans.
5
I lived in Turkey for 6 years and I know it pretty well. I don't support everything Turkey does and I don't like the Erdogan government. But, let's recall that when NATO did Kosovo, Greece did everything to thwart it to include Greeks attacking NATO convoys passing through their country. And France was not militarily integrated into NATO for years. And many nations were members when they were clearly dictatorships. Let's keep criticisms of Turkey within the realm of even-handed realism. Turkey is a long-standing and full-fledged member of NATO and it doesn't have to repeatedly re-validate its status as such any more than other nations have to.
11
After Turkey's ardent support and cooperation with the U. S. and NATO through the Cold War, they were rewarded with a poke in the eye with the congressional resolution condeming the Turkish 'genocide' against Armenians in the early Twentieth Century. At that moment, the U. S. and NATO transitioned from a commitment to a convenience for all future Turkish governments. If you are surprised by Turkey's individualistic behavior in relation to its NATO allies, you were not paying attention.
4
Turkey is a member of NATO in name only. They are not acting like an alliance member and are in fact responsible for becoming more authoritarian and allowing ISIS to grow. Erdogan is now playing a double game with fire the way the Pakistani's did with the Taliban.
Kick them out. Turkey is the enemy. Put limits on visas and passports, and put them on notice. Yeah, I know some people see it as a buffer and an air base. We don't need it.
2
NATO just needs to take its toys and go home or destroy them on the ground and effectively end Turkey's 'membership'.
What is it about the West that it cannot see crazy/outlaw/sociopath leaders for what they are until it's too late? Is it intelligence failures or INTELLIGENCE failure? Do you know what I mean?
Do we assume just because a politician gets elected in an apparently free election that they are immune from psychopathology or personality disorders that indicate severely authoritarian or gangster-ish inclinations?
Good grief, we can look at our own legislatures and Congress and see the kinds of people voters will vote for.
20 years ago a social work supervisor pointed out in a meeting I was in that when a rational person tries to have a rational conversation with an irrational person that the rational person has become irrational themselves.
The West has become irrational in trying to make itself believe that glaringly irrational outlaw leaders are people they can rationally deal with.
They/we need to come up with some better plans.
What is it about the West that it cannot see crazy/outlaw/sociopath leaders for what they are until it's too late? Is it intelligence failures or INTELLIGENCE failure? Do you know what I mean?
Do we assume just because a politician gets elected in an apparently free election that they are immune from psychopathology or personality disorders that indicate severely authoritarian or gangster-ish inclinations?
Good grief, we can look at our own legislatures and Congress and see the kinds of people voters will vote for.
20 years ago a social work supervisor pointed out in a meeting I was in that when a rational person tries to have a rational conversation with an irrational person that the rational person has become irrational themselves.
The West has become irrational in trying to make itself believe that glaringly irrational outlaw leaders are people they can rationally deal with.
They/we need to come up with some better plans.
2
There needs to be a mechanism to remove a country from NATO or penalties inflicted against members who act in conflict with NATO's interests. There have been minimal consequences for Turkey's unabashedly anti-NATO, anti-democratic policies. In fact, NATO members continue to kowtow to Turkey by refusing to provide the Kurds with necessary arms to resist ISIS.
Additionally, Erdogan's bellicose language towards Israel (comparing the country to Nazi Germany) and his support for Hamas has created a toxic climate and emboldened a terrorist group (Hamas) over a more moderate potential partner for peace (Fatah).
It is not surprising that Erdogan has found common ground with Putin, as they remind me of each other more every day.
Additionally, Erdogan's bellicose language towards Israel (comparing the country to Nazi Germany) and his support for Hamas has created a toxic climate and emboldened a terrorist group (Hamas) over a more moderate potential partner for peace (Fatah).
It is not surprising that Erdogan has found common ground with Putin, as they remind me of each other more every day.
5
Israel fired on Turkish ships carrying nonlethal aid to the Palestinians of
Gaza. Turks died. NATO did nothing. Israel is not a member of NATO
or any formal alliance with the United States. It should have been the
subject of NATO reprisal. Why should the Turks take NATO seriously,
since the other members of NATO did not come to their aid?
Gaza. Turks died. NATO did nothing. Israel is not a member of NATO
or any formal alliance with the United States. It should have been the
subject of NATO reprisal. Why should the Turks take NATO seriously,
since the other members of NATO did not come to their aid?
13
The Turkish behavior is certainly ambiguous.
Turkey allows jihadists to go into Syria because they mostly have an european passport and they are certainly armed when they cross the border, stopping them as tourists would be illegal.
Turkey is building a gas pipeline from Russia, but this is business and not an offense to NATO.
Referring to the EU opposition to let Turkey enter in the Union, Turkey is Middle East not Europe.
I only agree on the article point about the Mr Erdogas authoritarian drift against minorities and opponents.
Anyhow it is the same offense made by Mr Assad against its own people, by Mr Netaniau against Palestinians, by Mr Al-Sisi against its opponents in Egypt, the King of Saudi Arabia towards its own population.
The question is therefore if USA want to kick all those authoritarian politicians which don't respect civil rights out, or cover its own eyes for everybody.
Civil rights disrespect is something I care, but it is not a reason to kick Turkey out from NATO now.
As you see, I treat jointly the USA and the NATO moves, since USA drives NATO.
Turkey allows jihadists to go into Syria because they mostly have an european passport and they are certainly armed when they cross the border, stopping them as tourists would be illegal.
Turkey is building a gas pipeline from Russia, but this is business and not an offense to NATO.
Referring to the EU opposition to let Turkey enter in the Union, Turkey is Middle East not Europe.
I only agree on the article point about the Mr Erdogas authoritarian drift against minorities and opponents.
Anyhow it is the same offense made by Mr Assad against its own people, by Mr Netaniau against Palestinians, by Mr Al-Sisi against its opponents in Egypt, the King of Saudi Arabia towards its own population.
The question is therefore if USA want to kick all those authoritarian politicians which don't respect civil rights out, or cover its own eyes for everybody.
Civil rights disrespect is something I care, but it is not a reason to kick Turkey out from NATO now.
As you see, I treat jointly the USA and the NATO moves, since USA drives NATO.
3
Turkey is rather far from the North Atlantic. And 46 Secretaries of State are a lot to deal with.
1
American officials say they don’t think Turkey will ever withdraw from NATO. Of course, such a move would be a catastrophic mistake
-------------------------------------------------
Really? If Turkey is doing things that are inimical to NATO interests, then NATO should kick the country out of alliance rather than HOPE it will not seek to withdraw from the alliance.
(1) I agree that Turkey should do a better job of controlling its border with Syria.
(2) I disagree that it should allow American bases on its soil. We need more bases like we need holes in our socks, if not our heads.
(3) Turkey should be free to buy its missile defense system from China, and integration with our system should not be a concern. It would seem to me that the angst stems more from our commercial interests than from our security concerns.
Kick'em out if they are not playing ball.
-------------------------------------------------
Really? If Turkey is doing things that are inimical to NATO interests, then NATO should kick the country out of alliance rather than HOPE it will not seek to withdraw from the alliance.
(1) I agree that Turkey should do a better job of controlling its border with Syria.
(2) I disagree that it should allow American bases on its soil. We need more bases like we need holes in our socks, if not our heads.
(3) Turkey should be free to buy its missile defense system from China, and integration with our system should not be a concern. It would seem to me that the angst stems more from our commercial interests than from our security concerns.
Kick'em out if they are not playing ball.
3
Turkey is no longer a sectarian democracy. It has joined the group of Islamic theocratic dictatorships. Turkey is neither a friend or ally to Europe and America. It has all but declared war against Israel, the only non Islamic democracy in the Middle East.
Remind me why we are defending Turkey?
Remind me why we are defending Turkey?
4
Rather than look at the Turks, how about recalling one of the founding fathers take on "entangling foreign alliances." Exactly why are we expanding lives and treasure around the globe? How did that work out for the Romans, French, British, and Soviets?
3
Yet another ally lost under the Obama Administration, Erdogan has said publicly him and Obama do not speak or have a personal relationship. First Egypt, then Israel, now Turkey. How Obama supporters defend his foreign policy is a mystery.
4
NATO was created for a specific purpose, and is no longer needed. Turkey is well aware of this, and is advancing its own interests. I have NEVER voted for Erdogan, and am very worried about his dictatorial tendencies. Yet, I do think Turkey should kiss NATO goodbye.
US and EU need to finally understand: with each passing decade NATO, much like its super power members, are increasingly becoming irrelevant.
US and EU need to finally understand: with each passing decade NATO, much like its super power members, are increasingly becoming irrelevant.
5
I guess the kind of allies that NYT think are "good" is Egypt and the likes of it. Sadly, this only confirms that the US is incapable of allying with strong and independent nations in the Middle East. The US government is so used to having "puppets" as allies in the ME, that the idea of being allies with strong independent nation frightens them. Yes, a strong Turkey will oppose the US in many fronts according to their own interests and views of the conflicts. This exactly what makes them worthy of being allies. If you want puppets? Keep sending Kerry to Sharm al-Shekih, that'll get you puppet dictatorships, don't expect to find them in Ankara.
8
NATO is being fundamentally undermined by several of its members. Its requirement of member unanimity before any action is taken is a fatal flaw that will likely prevent any meaningful NATO response to anything but a full scale Russian invasion of the West.
Given our uncertain times, NATO's core members must ask themselves whether a smaller NATO would actually be stronger and more effective than its current configuration of 26 countries. Serious consideration should be given to showing unreliable allies, such as Turkey and Hungary and perhaps Greece, the door.
Given our uncertain times, NATO's core members must ask themselves whether a smaller NATO would actually be stronger and more effective than its current configuration of 26 countries. Serious consideration should be given to showing unreliable allies, such as Turkey and Hungary and perhaps Greece, the door.
2
Ha. So no coverage of the Canadian spy who aided 3 British teenagers join ISIS, but instead an Op-Ed of Turkey's "drift from NATO". Ha, one cannot but think this is the American response to the scandal that Turkey chose to expose about the Western "partners". And at the very same day, the European Parliament adopts a report that recognizes Armenian "genocide". I guess Turkey hit a nerve. Western governments should develop a sense of respect for Turkey's rising influence and power, and ONLY then, they will understand how to work with them smoothly. Their mentality seem to be stuck at the time when Turkey was a weak undeveloped country.
Turkey may actually support ISIS as long as they don't enter Turkey. Reason being that the Kurds in the Northern parts of Syria, Iraq an Iran since Atta Turk, (some 100 years now) constantly cross the borders with Turkey illegally; especially Mosul in Iraq is a stronghold for Kurds opposing Turkey. All over the southern part of Turkey mayors of small villages are Kurds strengthening the loyalties of local populations, much to the chagrin of Ankara. So, in a way, ISIS is doing the dirty work for Erdogan.
3
The article says that "Turkey is acting in defiance of NATO’s priorities and interests". But who decides what are NATO’s priorities and interests? Shouldn't Turkey participate in deciding?
It appears that NATO is at risk because it's not recognizing the priorities and interests of NATO members. Not just Turkey's interests but also Germany's, France's, Italy's, etc. Are NATO’s actions really in the best interests of Europe?
It appears that NATO is at risk because it's not recognizing the priorities and interests of NATO members. Not just Turkey's interests but also Germany's, France's, Italy's, etc. Are NATO’s actions really in the best interests of Europe?
3
Is there a mechanism to throw a member out of NATO? If so, the procedure should be started on Turkey. Actions have consequences - they have taken (and not taken) actions that against NATO objectives - why are they not facing the consequences?
In my opinion it's time to reform NATO. This organization hasn't fulfilled the task that caused its creation a long time.
Expect trouble from Turkey. They have been responsible for some of the darkest chapters in human history and the actions of their current leader is placing his nation firmly in the camp of anti-democratic actors. NATO has become a joke, partially as a result of Turkey's recalcitrant behavior vis-a-vis Daesh. Erdogan is rolling back reforms that date to the time of Ataturk and installing himself as a dictator for life. We already have the Saudis to embarrass us: do we need another tyranny in our camp?
2
“… from fighting the Islamic State … to standing firm against Russian aggression in Ukraine … Erdogan and his government … are acting in outright defiance of NATO’s priorities and interests.”
With all due respect, this editorial does not address the core issues that drive Turkey’s policies toward NATO.
Turkey is a strategically and economically important country. Its membership in NATO has indeed played a “central role,” in the security and stability of Europe during the height of the Cold War.
Yet Europe has arbitrarily denied Turkey membership in the EU, a denial many in the Middle East believe is driven by racialist policies that have also denied full economic and political integrations for millions of European citizens of the Muslim faith in EU countries such as France, Germany and Belgium.
Turkey has not within recent memory initiated any military actions against any of its neighbors. It is compelled, however, to react against external meddling directed against its internal stability or wars ignited in its immediate vicinity.
The civil war in Syria, which was foolishly started to “peel off” Syria from Iran, has affected Turkey’s economy and security greatly, but Turkey cannot become directly involved in it lest it gets embroiled in a war with Iran.
Nor could Turkey confront its bigger neighbor Russia in Ukraine’s civil war, which was externally engineered against a democratically elected government in Ukraine.
Hence Turkey's caution toward NATO
With all due respect, this editorial does not address the core issues that drive Turkey’s policies toward NATO.
Turkey is a strategically and economically important country. Its membership in NATO has indeed played a “central role,” in the security and stability of Europe during the height of the Cold War.
Yet Europe has arbitrarily denied Turkey membership in the EU, a denial many in the Middle East believe is driven by racialist policies that have also denied full economic and political integrations for millions of European citizens of the Muslim faith in EU countries such as France, Germany and Belgium.
Turkey has not within recent memory initiated any military actions against any of its neighbors. It is compelled, however, to react against external meddling directed against its internal stability or wars ignited in its immediate vicinity.
The civil war in Syria, which was foolishly started to “peel off” Syria from Iran, has affected Turkey’s economy and security greatly, but Turkey cannot become directly involved in it lest it gets embroiled in a war with Iran.
Nor could Turkey confront its bigger neighbor Russia in Ukraine’s civil war, which was externally engineered against a democratically elected government in Ukraine.
Hence Turkey's caution toward NATO
7
NATO should have disbanded decades ago. It was created to contain totalitarian communism in Eastern Europe. That is long gone.
1
Turkey under Erdogan has quickly become a NINO – NATO in Name Only. Erdogan has made it pretty apparent for some time now that Turkey’s regional interests are not in sync with NATO. In fact, going back to the Iraq War in 2003, a newly elected Erdogan refused to allow US forces to use Turkish territory to invade Iraq from the north. In recent times, ISIS has thrived because of covert support from Sunni nations, such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar that are worried about the growing influence of Shia Iran in their backyards.
The very fact that Turkey is “considering buying from China a $3.4 billion air defense system” should be ringing alarm bells at NATO. Turkey could be in the process of overhauling its defense systems and making them independent of NATO? If Iran becomes a nuclear weapons-capable state, Turkey’s next step would be to pursue its own nuclear weapons capability. In fact, it’s widely rumored that Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, would then pressure Sunni Pakistan to sell some of its nuclear weapons to them.
So the question isn’t when NATO dumps Turkey, but when will Turkey withdraw from NATO? The geopolitics in the Middle East is changing rapidly and NATO needs to adjust accordingly. Thus NATO simply cannot afford to have an isolated Iran as a part of that changing reality. NATO needs to keep its friends close, but keep its enemies closer.
The very fact that Turkey is “considering buying from China a $3.4 billion air defense system” should be ringing alarm bells at NATO. Turkey could be in the process of overhauling its defense systems and making them independent of NATO? If Iran becomes a nuclear weapons-capable state, Turkey’s next step would be to pursue its own nuclear weapons capability. In fact, it’s widely rumored that Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, would then pressure Sunni Pakistan to sell some of its nuclear weapons to them.
So the question isn’t when NATO dumps Turkey, but when will Turkey withdraw from NATO? The geopolitics in the Middle East is changing rapidly and NATO needs to adjust accordingly. Thus NATO simply cannot afford to have an isolated Iran as a part of that changing reality. NATO needs to keep its friends close, but keep its enemies closer.
Iraq, war in Iraq, American aggression in Iraq was not simply a violation of international law. It was stupid, arrogant without justification, catastrophic to the Iraqi people, and a turning point in our relationships in the region. Our illegal war in Iraq is responsible for the carnage in the middle east, the Sunni v Shia sectarian wars, and distrust of American intentions around the world. American officials were guilty of using the terror evoked by 9/11 to deliberately attacking Iraq, a state that had absolutely no involvement with 9/11 or Al Qaeda. Subsequently, we have undermined our trust in the region by tacitly supporting a coup in Egypt and Ukraine of duly elected governments that did not meet our standards. Turkey's behavior should surprise no one.
It is our responsibility to mend relationships in the region, not our place to blame Turkey. In no way should we support Erdogan, who has set up a Sunni narrative, Erdogan has more in common with ISIS than with American in efforts in Ukraine.
This is a very dangerous game. Israel under Sharon and Netanyahu wants to push us into the arms of Saudi-Qatari-Kuwaiti Wahhabism against Iran and the Shia "apostates". The Sunni monarchies pretend to ally with us against ISIS but owe their existence to the Wahhabi cult in their respective countries. Erdogan has non-democratic and Sunni myths at his base of support. And America has a lunatic fringe of Republicans who have thrown in with Netanyahu against our own President.
It is our responsibility to mend relationships in the region, not our place to blame Turkey. In no way should we support Erdogan, who has set up a Sunni narrative, Erdogan has more in common with ISIS than with American in efforts in Ukraine.
This is a very dangerous game. Israel under Sharon and Netanyahu wants to push us into the arms of Saudi-Qatari-Kuwaiti Wahhabism against Iran and the Shia "apostates". The Sunni monarchies pretend to ally with us against ISIS but owe their existence to the Wahhabi cult in their respective countries. Erdogan has non-democratic and Sunni myths at his base of support. And America has a lunatic fringe of Republicans who have thrown in with Netanyahu against our own President.
8
The Turkish behavior is certainly ambiguous.
Turkey allows jihadists to go into Syria because they have an european passport and they are certainly armed wen they cross the border, stopping them would be illegal.
Turkey is building a gas pipeline from Russia, but this is business and not an offense to NATO.
For sure Turkey is not Europe but Middle East, so cannot enter into the EU for geographic reasons.
I only agree on the article points for the Mr Erdogan authoritarian drift.
Anyhow it is the same offense as the Mr Assad's one and the Mr al-Sisi in Egypt.
The question is therefore if USA want to do something, it should kick out Mr Ergogan, Mr Assad and Mr Al-Sisi, otherwise it should cover its eyes for everybody.
The Mr Erdogan's authoritarian drift is civil rights question which USA should care of, not a reason to kick Turkey out from NATO.
As you see I have a problem separating the USA interests from the NATO ones.
Turkey allows jihadists to go into Syria because they have an european passport and they are certainly armed wen they cross the border, stopping them would be illegal.
Turkey is building a gas pipeline from Russia, but this is business and not an offense to NATO.
For sure Turkey is not Europe but Middle East, so cannot enter into the EU for geographic reasons.
I only agree on the article points for the Mr Erdogan authoritarian drift.
Anyhow it is the same offense as the Mr Assad's one and the Mr al-Sisi in Egypt.
The question is therefore if USA want to do something, it should kick out Mr Ergogan, Mr Assad and Mr Al-Sisi, otherwise it should cover its eyes for everybody.
The Mr Erdogan's authoritarian drift is civil rights question which USA should care of, not a reason to kick Turkey out from NATO.
As you see I have a problem separating the USA interests from the NATO ones.
This seems to be a paid political advertisement on behalf of the US military industrial complex. Turkey, like France and Israel, have their own foreign policy and interests. This is their right as nations. This is not about Erdogan at all. This article is very much more about the US demanding the right to dictate other nations national and military policy. Turkey is a solid ally and, last I heard, remains one.
4
It is surprising that the Times doesn't see Turkey's actions in a more global light, and carries an outdated idea that NATO and the US are right about everything. Turkey is balancing its affiliations as it sees fit, just as India is doing in its sphere and even Britain and Australia may do by joining the Asia Development bank. Turkey lives in a tough neighborhood and sees a multi- faceted world, unlike Washington which wants everyone to look and do like us.
3
The primary reason for Turkey joining NATO was because it offered protection against threats from the Soviet Union and therefore in Turkey's best security interests at the time. With the Soviet threat no longer an issue, membership of NATO is a burden that Turkey could do without. In the unlikely event of a conflict between NATO and Russian forces, do not hold your breath for Turkey's help.
The country of flotillas a bad ally? Who woulda thought it?
1
While I don't applaud Turkey's reasons, I do applaud their action in being cool towards NATO. American pressure to make Russia's neighbors NATO members was directly responsible for the present mess in the Ukraine. We seem incapable at looking at the world through Russian eyes. What would our reaction be if Mexico and the Caribbean had hostile troops, and missiles aimed at NYC and Washington? I think we already know that, from the Cuban missile crisis.
3
Turkey has been treated like a pariah by the EU on admission to the Union. So why should it support any Western interests, particularly if its people don't consider ISIS a threat? It is a democracy after all.
A secular Turkey was a good ally. This one, under Erdogan, is less so. In his aim to become the leader in the Muslim world, he has a strange mix of philosophies, including opposing any assistance to the West in the effort against IS unless "a Western coalition puts troops on the ground and includes attacking Assad". He has an agenda and wants the West to do the fighting and dying for him, whilst remaining a NATO partner.
2
From its creation in the aftermath of World War I, Turkey has been a country run by the military with a facade of democratic papering. The alliance between NATO and Turkey did not arise from shared political philosophies, but as a response to the Soviet Union. The late 1940s and the 1950s saw Soviet acquisition of Eastern Europe, troubles in Greece, and aiding of the Chinese communists. Turkey was seen as strategic and tactical asset to counter Moscow. The real relationship between Turkey and the US is military. The Turkish army remains a powerbroker. Its forces are careful in who and when to attack. It is careful in its relations with Iran; it was reluctant in both Gulf wars and did not attack Saddam Hussein’s forces; it attacked Kurdish forces only when Saddam was gone; the presence of Patriot missiles has little to do with a potential Syrian attack and more to do with a Damascus regime change. Mr. Erdogan has redirected Turkey’s attention eastward. His policies are sometimes referred to as a new “Ottomanism.” Ankara has followed a plan to gain influence whether by momentarily championing aid to Palestinians in Gaza, presenting itself as a rebirth of the Ottoman Caliphate, or seeking the elimination of Asad in alliance with the Arab Gulf kingdoms.
1
The fact is that secular Turkey is become more and more of a radicalized Islamic state, which means Turkish leaders can't be trusted. While this is too bad for the Turkish people, we need to start thinking about Turkey as more of a potential enemy than an actual friend.
1
"American officials say they don’t think Turkey will ever withdraw from NATO."
The problem is that American officials don't think!
This tin-pot dictator (whose support comes the same religious fanatics who support ISIS and their war against Kurds and Christians) has been playing us long enough. His continuing attacks on his opponents which include, but are not limited to, jail and torture are reason enough to boot him out.
The problem is that American officials don't think!
This tin-pot dictator (whose support comes the same religious fanatics who support ISIS and their war against Kurds and Christians) has been playing us long enough. His continuing attacks on his opponents which include, but are not limited to, jail and torture are reason enough to boot him out.
3
Religion-based government is almost always irrational and inscrutable.
1
It's time to cut our losses with any 'friend' in the muslim world. Let them all destroy each other and then do business with whoever is left
Is it really important if Turkey formally withdraws from NATO if its behavior already demonstates its increasingly unreliable as a NATO partner?
The situation with Turkey reminds me of that old joke when the Lone Ranger and Tonto find themselves suddenly surrounded by an entire tribe of hostile Indians. "What are we gonna do?" shouts the Lone Ranger. "What do you mean WE ?" replies Tonto.
Turkey is a Muslim nation. Forget its 20th century evolution into a modern nation and gradual tilt towards the West. It's part and parcel of centuries of fighting and struggle largely as a result of geography. Frankly I don't trust a nation whose entrance into the western shield is comparatively recent. Because it sounds as if Turkey is hedging its bets between Washington and Moscow.
A vascillating or lukewarm ally is no better than no ally. When an ally says ISIS is no great threat, the US and its allies should take note. Because the Turkey's opportunistic president is as likely to define "we" as pro-Islam as it is pro west.
The situation with Turkey reminds me of that old joke when the Lone Ranger and Tonto find themselves suddenly surrounded by an entire tribe of hostile Indians. "What are we gonna do?" shouts the Lone Ranger. "What do you mean WE ?" replies Tonto.
Turkey is a Muslim nation. Forget its 20th century evolution into a modern nation and gradual tilt towards the West. It's part and parcel of centuries of fighting and struggle largely as a result of geography. Frankly I don't trust a nation whose entrance into the western shield is comparatively recent. Because it sounds as if Turkey is hedging its bets between Washington and Moscow.
A vascillating or lukewarm ally is no better than no ally. When an ally says ISIS is no great threat, the US and its allies should take note. Because the Turkey's opportunistic president is as likely to define "we" as pro-Islam as it is pro west.
1
NATO nervous about their ambivalence? Really? Nato? Turkey? I mean, if Turkey has any portion of their brain left, they will run to NATO for inclusion, not exclusion. By themselves, they couldnt protect a tree from air pollution. And what are we worried about? Take a lesson from Russia? If they dont want to join us, we go it alone!
Erdogan used to be buddies with Assad and only turned on him when it seemed advantageous with Saudi encouragement. Erdogan wants the Caliphate to be in Turkey with him in his ostentatious new palace.
He supports extremists in Turkey and has no intentions of staunching the flow to fight with ISIS.
His egomaniacal nationalism has taken over, he is trying to re establish the Ottoman empire. NATO should kick him out. It has nothing to do with EU being slow to admit him--- he had his own designs on returning Turkey to Ottoman rule and has turned the secular nation into a religious one that Ataturk would decry. He is Sunni. He and ISIS have an arrangement, to a degree, and he is not about to bring his significant military to bear against them.
NATO doesn't kick him out, possibly b/c of his increasing ties to Russia, 'keep your enemies close'. Secular Turks see what he's doing and are frightened---he's arrested/dismissed half the judiciary for looking into corruption in his ranks and clamps down on dissent.
Seems the internat'l community is just watching to see what comes next in his megalomania with grandiose vision of return to Ottoman empire. NATO is a fly speck in his vast vision. No way to call him an ally any more.
He supports extremists in Turkey and has no intentions of staunching the flow to fight with ISIS.
His egomaniacal nationalism has taken over, he is trying to re establish the Ottoman empire. NATO should kick him out. It has nothing to do with EU being slow to admit him--- he had his own designs on returning Turkey to Ottoman rule and has turned the secular nation into a religious one that Ataturk would decry. He is Sunni. He and ISIS have an arrangement, to a degree, and he is not about to bring his significant military to bear against them.
NATO doesn't kick him out, possibly b/c of his increasing ties to Russia, 'keep your enemies close'. Secular Turks see what he's doing and are frightened---he's arrested/dismissed half the judiciary for looking into corruption in his ranks and clamps down on dissent.
Seems the internat'l community is just watching to see what comes next in his megalomania with grandiose vision of return to Ottoman empire. NATO is a fly speck in his vast vision. No way to call him an ally any more.
5
East is east and west is west and never the twain shall meet.
Ever since Turkey refused to fight ISIS in a city right beside the Turkish border, I finalized my conclusion that Turkey is an enemy of NATO, not a friend, and should be kicked out of NATO.
In addition to all the questionable conduct raised in this article, Turkey is also making a fortune in black market trade of oil with ISIS. Erdogan has talked of creating a caliphate, and after building the largest (and ugliest) Presidential palace in the world, it is obvious that he sees himself as the head of the Caliphate after ISIS does all the work to establish it. Turkey is actually ISIS's major ally.
NATO is made up of secular democracies. When Turkey joined NATO it too was a secular democracy. Now, Turkey is ruled by an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and is becoming a totalitarian theocracy. Its friendships and goals are contrary to NATO's. Once again, facts show Turkey is no friend of NATO and should be kicked out of the organization.
Finally, in addition to being expelled from NATO, Turkey should also be subject to the same sanctions as those imposed on Russia, as Turkey has purposely weakened the sanctions.
In addition to all the questionable conduct raised in this article, Turkey is also making a fortune in black market trade of oil with ISIS. Erdogan has talked of creating a caliphate, and after building the largest (and ugliest) Presidential palace in the world, it is obvious that he sees himself as the head of the Caliphate after ISIS does all the work to establish it. Turkey is actually ISIS's major ally.
NATO is made up of secular democracies. When Turkey joined NATO it too was a secular democracy. Now, Turkey is ruled by an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and is becoming a totalitarian theocracy. Its friendships and goals are contrary to NATO's. Once again, facts show Turkey is no friend of NATO and should be kicked out of the organization.
Finally, in addition to being expelled from NATO, Turkey should also be subject to the same sanctions as those imposed on Russia, as Turkey has purposely weakened the sanctions.
1
All things considered, and if you ever met Turks, who though overwhelmingly Muslim, are not by any stretch of the imagination, Arabs, the nicest of folks, these developments are very troubling! Ataturk, must be rolling over in his grave!
(Note, ironically in a separate article in the Times, that is a painting of Kemal Ataturk himself, hanging behind Erdogan at his desk!!!)
(Note, ironically in a separate article in the Times, that is a painting of Kemal Ataturk himself, hanging behind Erdogan at his desk!!!)
3
NATO was structured to defend against an attack by Russia during the Cold War. With that war won, NATO has lost much of its raison d'être. From Turkey's standpoint the nuclear shield provided by NATO precluded its need to develop expensive nuclear weapon capability. They now realize that this was a short term benefit but a strategic mistake.
Turkey now sees NATO pulling out of Afghanistan leaving the Taliban intact and a dormant threat, defense budgets in the West steadily decreasing and, most importantly, the West on the verge of acquiescing to Iran's nuclear weapons program that will enable it to achieve its age old hegemonic ambitions in the ME.
In this developing reality, depending on NATO to support Turkey's interests is no longer a realistic policy. In response to the Iranian control of Syria, Lebanon, most of Iraq and Yemen, Turkey must now look to the Gulf States and Egypt to form a Sunni response to the Increasing Shia areas of control.
It once could look to Israel in that effort but Erdogan has poisoned that relationship of late. Nevertheless, it will have to change that policy since Israel now provides the only reliable nuclear defense capability against Iranian expansion. He certainly can't look to a US that is currently providing air support for Iranian backed forces as they consolidate their control of Iraq.
Turkey now sees NATO pulling out of Afghanistan leaving the Taliban intact and a dormant threat, defense budgets in the West steadily decreasing and, most importantly, the West on the verge of acquiescing to Iran's nuclear weapons program that will enable it to achieve its age old hegemonic ambitions in the ME.
In this developing reality, depending on NATO to support Turkey's interests is no longer a realistic policy. In response to the Iranian control of Syria, Lebanon, most of Iraq and Yemen, Turkey must now look to the Gulf States and Egypt to form a Sunni response to the Increasing Shia areas of control.
It once could look to Israel in that effort but Erdogan has poisoned that relationship of late. Nevertheless, it will have to change that policy since Israel now provides the only reliable nuclear defense capability against Iranian expansion. He certainly can't look to a US that is currently providing air support for Iranian backed forces as they consolidate their control of Iraq.
3
I think the idea of Turkey joining the EU is dead, and I think that almost everyone in Turkey or the EU has assumed that for the last few years without coming right out and saying it.
The NATO issue has more complex ramifications. Turkey is not really a useful ally now (to NATO or the US) - they still cooperate on some issues, but actively undermine on others. I doubt that anyone thinks they would live up to the mutual defense obligations under NATO treaties. Further, I doubt that other NATO countries would honor those obligations to Turkey unless the specific circumstances of an attack made mutual support a no-brainer. And as of today, who really is in position to mount a meaningful attack on Turkey other than Russia? The problem is that this situation - maintaining a treaty and an org that are just paper - undermines all NATO ties. If we're not going to be committed to one signatory, aren't all the other commitments variable as well?
The NATO issue has more complex ramifications. Turkey is not really a useful ally now (to NATO or the US) - they still cooperate on some issues, but actively undermine on others. I doubt that anyone thinks they would live up to the mutual defense obligations under NATO treaties. Further, I doubt that other NATO countries would honor those obligations to Turkey unless the specific circumstances of an attack made mutual support a no-brainer. And as of today, who really is in position to mount a meaningful attack on Turkey other than Russia? The problem is that this situation - maintaining a treaty and an org that are just paper - undermines all NATO ties. If we're not going to be committed to one signatory, aren't all the other commitments variable as well?
Turkeys president is going to be the dowfall of turkey.
Economic: it is just question of time before the buble of thebt will burst.
Civil and humen rights: we all saw and still see how the true colors of this dictator comes out aginst the kurds his own people and any one who doesnt agree with him.
Security: i have no doubt that turkey will pay dearly once ISIS turn its sights north. His all idea to realine Turkey with the arab/ muslim world and becoming its leader is coming back to hunt him but he is doubling down on ISIS just to see Assad out. Turkey think that it can control ISIS and use it just like Pakistan use the Taliban and other terrorist groups in Pakistan and Afgannistan ( look how well its wotking for them in Pakistan.) it might be a good idea to save turky from itself
Economic: it is just question of time before the buble of thebt will burst.
Civil and humen rights: we all saw and still see how the true colors of this dictator comes out aginst the kurds his own people and any one who doesnt agree with him.
Security: i have no doubt that turkey will pay dearly once ISIS turn its sights north. His all idea to realine Turkey with the arab/ muslim world and becoming its leader is coming back to hunt him but he is doubling down on ISIS just to see Assad out. Turkey think that it can control ISIS and use it just like Pakistan use the Taliban and other terrorist groups in Pakistan and Afgannistan ( look how well its wotking for them in Pakistan.) it might be a good idea to save turky from itself
1
As Oriana Fallaci said a decade ago: "La Turchia non ha niente da fare con l'Europa." Turkey has no place in Europe. Far from being the Muslim country that most resembles the West, it is among the most belligerent of Muslim countries that wants to thwart the West--and at the same time, gain all the benefits of access to the West, where it deposits millions of its citizens as guest workers, e.g., in Germany, and eventually as an internally disruptive force in the European fabric. The West needs the Bosporus and the Dardanelles and a quiet eastern Mediterranean, so to that extent Turkey is indispensable to NATO. But Erdogan and the Islamizing trend that his Freedom and Justice Party has fomented are very much dispensable--and should be dispensed with if the West hopes to maintain its own territorial integrity.
Perhaps the war last year in Gaza was a sore point for President Erdogan. Couldn't blame him.
1
I am not claiming Erdoğan is the best leader we have ever had but when he called depressed EU for allied power against Assad it turned back as it was only Turkey's boundary problem. Turkey had clashed with kurdish terrorists that western "allies" call activists (with guns) for decades and gave a huge civilian lost and economic loss. Also While Palestinian civilians are being slaughtered and Syrian civilians killed by its own dictator leader where is that sensibility? Slaughtered western civilians now makes ISIS top threat topic for EU and US. In my opinion It won't be the first terrorist formation as that sensibility issues change due to dying civilians nationality.
1
The flow of ISIS fighters through Turkey is bad enough now. Imagine if the direction of that flow were reversed. No city in Europe would be safe. As it is, any current safety is precarious, and Europeans can hardly thank Turkey for its help.
2
The history of Turkey since WWI has always been to preserve Turkey and stay out of European and Western Wars. Turkey is adept, very adept at playing one side off against another. Turkey also, always remember Gallipoli and the invasion by the British and the Australians. During the first Iraq war Turkey refused to allow American troops to transit Turkey for an invasion of the northern tier of Iraq. She also refused to allow the use of Incirlik Air Force base and now Turkey is buying a $3.4 billion air defense system from China. Turkey's brutal repression of the Kurds, the porous border allowing the Islamist to easily cross over and continue that war, plus the ongoing repression within Turkey itself, all these should be telling. Turkey wants to be part of Europe but holds no Western values or ideals. It is an Islamist, religious state that sees more benefit to belong to a union or association with Russia and China. Turkey is exploiting everyone to her own benefit while ending secularism and democracy at home.
It's time to let Turkey go it's own way and face reality. Turkey is not an ally of the West. It is not a democracy. Turkey is an Islamist, conservative, state ruled by religious dictators and autocrats. Turkey's only interest is Turkey. It's rifts with Europe, the U.S. and Israel are all exposed. This is just another totalitarian state aligned against the West. Let it go.
It's time to let Turkey go it's own way and face reality. Turkey is not an ally of the West. It is not a democracy. Turkey is an Islamist, conservative, state ruled by religious dictators and autocrats. Turkey's only interest is Turkey. It's rifts with Europe, the U.S. and Israel are all exposed. This is just another totalitarian state aligned against the West. Let it go.
3
Erdogan's vision of Islam is the problem. He is scoring points with his base--the hicks and bumpkins of Turkey's rural areas--as surely as any GOP fanatic who gets up and bashes gays and claims the Earth to be 6000 years old.
Turks have been uniformly generous and kind during my visits to the cities and countryside. That said, while it is politically incorrect to revile a religion, I'm going to do that. Until a moderate form of Islam arises from the masses, the drift from modernity and The West will continue. ISIS will find fertile ground in Anatolia. Erdogan may even be a fellow traveler.
Mustafa Kemal would have dragged him out and had him shot. I still want the Turkish Army to defend Ataturk's legacy of secularism again, and get rid of this enemy of the West and modernity.
Turks have been uniformly generous and kind during my visits to the cities and countryside. That said, while it is politically incorrect to revile a religion, I'm going to do that. Until a moderate form of Islam arises from the masses, the drift from modernity and The West will continue. ISIS will find fertile ground in Anatolia. Erdogan may even be a fellow traveler.
Mustafa Kemal would have dragged him out and had him shot. I still want the Turkish Army to defend Ataturk's legacy of secularism again, and get rid of this enemy of the West and modernity.
2
Turkey looking out for Turkey's interests without first gaining permission from the United States! One must realize that Turkey has watched the United States over the past fifteen years diminish it self through its incompetent war making in the Middle East.
American bumbling has achieved nothing constructive. It has merely disrupted the region to such an extent that it has weakened the state system even more and given purpose to the rise of violent Islamic reaction such as ISIS.
The Turks may or may not being making a mistake in their new direction but the feckless and blundering foreign policy of the United States has been a contributing factor to their choices.
American bumbling has achieved nothing constructive. It has merely disrupted the region to such an extent that it has weakened the state system even more and given purpose to the rise of violent Islamic reaction such as ISIS.
The Turks may or may not being making a mistake in their new direction but the feckless and blundering foreign policy of the United States has been a contributing factor to their choices.
1
"Of course, such a move would be a catastrophic mistake."
Why is it presumed that Turkey's withdrawal from NATO would be a catastrophic mistake?
The dramatic statement highlights a problem found with many editorials and other short essays: asserting dramatic conclusions without taking the time to muster facts or logic.
Why is it presumed that Turkey's withdrawal from NATO would be a catastrophic mistake?
The dramatic statement highlights a problem found with many editorials and other short essays: asserting dramatic conclusions without taking the time to muster facts or logic.
1
There's a bit of a farce in the editorial. So Turkey is becoming increasingly authoritarian and this is a problem for an alliance "founded on the principles of democracy". Didn't seem to be a problem when Spain, Portugal, Greece and Turkey were dictatorships, did it?
2
All goes back to post World War scenario when West created host of banana states and denied homeland to Kurds. The Turkish leader groomed by West, Ata Turk was so much aping the European model of nationalism that he refused to consider Kurds as separate ethnic entity and instead called them "mountain Turks". Frankly no one cared/cares if they are Kurds or Turks or whatever as long as strategic interests are not threatened.
OF the entire article I was most struck by my reaction towards the authors state,meant ".. a Chinese system might contain risky software, and members of Congress oppose it." Formulating foreign policy based on what the current Congress approves or disapproves is akin to letting your dog decide what you are going to eat for dinner. The inability of our elected representatives to demonstrate any leadership has sadly become conventional wisdom to anyone who is paying attention!
1
It's the one hundred year anniversary of the Armenian genocide, and yet the good democratic Turks still deny reality. You can never, ever trust the power brokers of Turkey. They have their agenda, it will never coincide with secular western nations.
Turkey is at a dangerous crossroads. Erdogan is going the way of Putiin. As usual when a 'ally' perpetrates crimes against their own population, ala, Saudi, Egypt, Russia, China, the so called 'world powers' are powerless.
Having successfully defanged the UN, the veto yielding countries have essentially converted the UN into an aid agency with no real power, albeit doing an enormous amount of good around the world.
The post world war 2 order that the 'West' had preserved, even if on it's own terms and through the lens of its own perspective and its own cultural norms, had kept the lid on until other countries that had been colonized prior, regained their self confidence.
Now those countries are starting to chart their own destinies which often lie very squarely outside of the well-designed box that the western powers had created.
The straw that broke the camel's back was the invasion of Iraq.
Obama has been partially right in putting diplomacy over war, but a little stick in the right places might be needed unfortunately. Starting with Syria and Ukraine perhaps, but this time paid with the blood and treasure of regional 'allies' including the Europeans and the Arabs.
Having successfully defanged the UN, the veto yielding countries have essentially converted the UN into an aid agency with no real power, albeit doing an enormous amount of good around the world.
The post world war 2 order that the 'West' had preserved, even if on it's own terms and through the lens of its own perspective and its own cultural norms, had kept the lid on until other countries that had been colonized prior, regained their self confidence.
Now those countries are starting to chart their own destinies which often lie very squarely outside of the well-designed box that the western powers had created.
The straw that broke the camel's back was the invasion of Iraq.
Obama has been partially right in putting diplomacy over war, but a little stick in the right places might be needed unfortunately. Starting with Syria and Ukraine perhaps, but this time paid with the blood and treasure of regional 'allies' including the Europeans and the Arabs.
1
Turkey's actions seem illogical when facts are ignored.
Facts remain:
- Turkey was not let in to EU after many years of trying.
- Turkey, under Islamist Erdogan, is a fanatic Islamic state.
- Turkey has been getting paid by Saudis to provide logistic and personnel support for ISIS from day one.
- Turkey has great incentive to eliminate Kurdish and other minority populations, same way they massacred Armenians.
- Turkey aspires to revive its Ottoman empire status, domination of middle east and north Africa, if not Europe.
- Turkey has been getting a pass on all their actions by US in exchange for their military logistic support against Russia.
But equations are changing. Ukraine is replacing Turkey as US' and NATO's military logistic support against Russia, being much closer to Moscow, and having direct borders. Turkey will be losing great deal of financial and military aid and they are trying to make it up from Saudis and becoming an Islamic state.
Facts remain:
- Turkey was not let in to EU after many years of trying.
- Turkey, under Islamist Erdogan, is a fanatic Islamic state.
- Turkey has been getting paid by Saudis to provide logistic and personnel support for ISIS from day one.
- Turkey has great incentive to eliminate Kurdish and other minority populations, same way they massacred Armenians.
- Turkey aspires to revive its Ottoman empire status, domination of middle east and north Africa, if not Europe.
- Turkey has been getting a pass on all their actions by US in exchange for their military logistic support against Russia.
But equations are changing. Ukraine is replacing Turkey as US' and NATO's military logistic support against Russia, being much closer to Moscow, and having direct borders. Turkey will be losing great deal of financial and military aid and they are trying to make it up from Saudis and becoming an Islamic state.
3
Turkey has historically always pursued its national interests. It has never given up its sovereignty to any foreign power or alliance. It now clearly sees that the American project in the Middle East is a failure. The expansion of the European Union has imprisoned the weaker economies in a net of debt and stagnation thats them as lepers. It has nothing to gain from EU membership. Sure, we can always demonize the Turks, organize the takeover of a major square in Istanbul by "pro-democracy" protesters and engineer a coup, then see what happens.
1
Apparently some in the West has not realized that NATO is an artifact of the Cold War and is no longer relevant to anybody's national security in the Modern Age. Further, perhaps even democratic theories of governance are in their twilight years. There might have been a migration toward the UN, but that couldn't happen either because it devolved into an impotent and useless body of nations whose agendas are dominated by a few. It's time to move on and the US needs to assist in that inevitable process in sharing power in the realization that they are leading no one anywhere. The best and only real leadership comes by example. Fresh ideas and thinking about a changed world is not the forte of those who benefit by the status quo. Mindless, endless wars and US involvement in them is counterproductive to genuine peace and prosperity anywhere. Being the only superpower left in the world seems to lead to arrogance and the belief we are always right. Perhaps that is America's fatal flaw which may well lead to our undoing in the foreseeable future. "Might is right" just doesn't work anymore.
2
This is a rather silly and unfortunate editorial. It simply arbitrarily attempts to legislate what Turkey should and not do given its membership in NATO. No attempt however is made to refer to any provision of the NATO Charter which, according to this editorial, Turkey is accused of violating.
NATO is a defense treaty, with terms stipulating when the treaty can be invoked. It is not a unified treaty of foreign policy binding upon the members. If that is what the Times' editorial board wants, it can publicly advocate such a treaty binding upon all members. There is zero chance of a treaty of this nature being recommended or approved by any president or any Congress.
In the interim, Turkey can conduct its own foreign policy, as determined by its domestic interests and its foreign interests, and do so in ways similar to how other members of NATO, with respect to trade or whatever, conduct their affairs with Russia. The U.S., it should be noted, purchases missile engines and parts from Russia for its own space program.
As a defense treaty, the members of NATO have a process by which decisions and priorities are made. If Turkey has violated that process, the Times' editorial board should say how. Otherwise, the Times' editorial board seems to be claiming an exceptional role for the U.S. in unilaterally dictating the foreign affairs and defense policies of member states of NATO without the member states having reciprocal rights to do the same.
NATO is a defense treaty, with terms stipulating when the treaty can be invoked. It is not a unified treaty of foreign policy binding upon the members. If that is what the Times' editorial board wants, it can publicly advocate such a treaty binding upon all members. There is zero chance of a treaty of this nature being recommended or approved by any president or any Congress.
In the interim, Turkey can conduct its own foreign policy, as determined by its domestic interests and its foreign interests, and do so in ways similar to how other members of NATO, with respect to trade or whatever, conduct their affairs with Russia. The U.S., it should be noted, purchases missile engines and parts from Russia for its own space program.
As a defense treaty, the members of NATO have a process by which decisions and priorities are made. If Turkey has violated that process, the Times' editorial board should say how. Otherwise, the Times' editorial board seems to be claiming an exceptional role for the U.S. in unilaterally dictating the foreign affairs and defense policies of member states of NATO without the member states having reciprocal rights to do the same.
1
Most of the readers confuse Turkish Republic that Ataturk found in 1923 based on secular principles and despite all of its past sometimes shaky internal aspects was a strong dependable ally with the country under authoritarian Islamist Erdogan's AKP under last 12-years.
Let us not forget that the US and the EU gave Erdogan always a free pass up until recently and still in some manners, while he systematically weakened basic secular foundations of the republic and democracy (no free press he indirectly owns majority of the newspapers and TV stations, no independent judiciary).
The US and the EU, if they are serious about helping their NATO ally and its silent majority that has been suffering under increasingly despotic rule of Erdogan, can bring tons of credible evidences to the International Court of Hague on Erdogan and its officials that has been supporting weapons and logistics ISIS from the get go before these barbarians became much stronger force just to topple Assad.
Erdogan and his party need to be isolated to the fullest but also the US and the EU need to explain to the silent majority and help the opposition parties to get rid of him for good and bring back Turkey to what it stands for under Ataturk's secular western principles.
Let us not forget that the US and the EU gave Erdogan always a free pass up until recently and still in some manners, while he systematically weakened basic secular foundations of the republic and democracy (no free press he indirectly owns majority of the newspapers and TV stations, no independent judiciary).
The US and the EU, if they are serious about helping their NATO ally and its silent majority that has been suffering under increasingly despotic rule of Erdogan, can bring tons of credible evidences to the International Court of Hague on Erdogan and its officials that has been supporting weapons and logistics ISIS from the get go before these barbarians became much stronger force just to topple Assad.
Erdogan and his party need to be isolated to the fullest but also the US and the EU need to explain to the silent majority and help the opposition parties to get rid of him for good and bring back Turkey to what it stands for under Ataturk's secular western principles.
7
I agree about the concerns regarding Erdogan's increasingly authoritarian approach. At the same time, I feel Europe pushed Turkey away by not offering a full EU membership for years. Turkey started looking towards the East after it lost hope in getting a full EU membership. The relationship with NATO appears to be part of the same deal. A full EU member Turkey would have been a better democracy and would have shared the Western interests. Erdogan and his AKP are there to stay as long as we have a corrupt and incapable opposition in the form of CHP.
1
Perhaps the real issue is Western Europe's drift from NATO. Throughout the alliance there appears to be a drawdown of support from European participants. Even Britain, a once stalwart supporter, is shrinking its military position. British expenditure on defense has declined by 10% in the last five years. Britain's regular army could shrink to 50,000 troops by 2019. Which leaves the obvious question. Why is the United States committed to this alliance? Let Europe protect itself. It has the population and resources equivalent to our nation. (500M people, comparable GDP) NATO should be abandoned and the European Union should be required to provide its own defense force under Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union.
Turkey is acting in its own self interest. When it signed on to NATO it was doing the same. Times change, allegiances change. This should not really be that shocking. All of Their behavior suggests Turkey is more comfortable with Russia than perhaps We, as an ally, would like.
It seems as if the NATO countries are more concerned with Turkey's potential withdrawal from the Organization for their own security needs. But these treaties are usually more about psychological warfare than "true" security agreements.
Recall how Czechoslovakia's treaty helped them before WWII. It Didn't.
Most countries are unlikely to honor a security agreement with another country, unless Both countries are physically threatened. Treaties may serve to "comfort"in times of peace, but are not necessarily honored when it counts anyway.
Turkey doesn't feel they need us anymore, and they might be right. Its their call and We need to respect their decision. But at the same time,the US needs to make sure We are not "used" by Turkey in in geo political arena.
We may need to encourage them to show their commitment to the US within a specific timeframe or encourage them to leave and be over with it.
It seems as if the NATO countries are more concerned with Turkey's potential withdrawal from the Organization for their own security needs. But these treaties are usually more about psychological warfare than "true" security agreements.
Recall how Czechoslovakia's treaty helped them before WWII. It Didn't.
Most countries are unlikely to honor a security agreement with another country, unless Both countries are physically threatened. Treaties may serve to "comfort"in times of peace, but are not necessarily honored when it counts anyway.
Turkey doesn't feel they need us anymore, and they might be right. Its their call and We need to respect their decision. But at the same time,the US needs to make sure We are not "used" by Turkey in in geo political arena.
We may need to encourage them to show their commitment to the US within a specific timeframe or encourage them to leave and be over with it.
13
My favorite part of this editorial is this passage:
"The purchase is opposed by the American and European allies because they view this military purchase from China as a risk. They are also disturbed that Turkey is not purchasing a system from them, because they have borne the cost of defending Turkey against a Syrian attack by stationing Patriot missile batteries on Turkish territory."
If purchased from the West, the missiles would be bought from a private defense contractor. But the "American and European allies" cited in the passage so identify themselves with the for-profit weapons manufacturers, that they consider themselves and their countries to be part of the "them" who are being cheated by having the weapons contract go elsewhere after "they" (presumably the taxpayers of the NATO countries and not Raytheon) helped pay to station Patriot missile batteries in Turkey.
Howard Dean used to say that in Washington, a "gaffe" is accidentally telling the truth. That appears to be what these security establishment types have committed, a gaffe.
It's a little troubling that this gaffe -- conflating the nation with private, wealthy, powerful and connected defense contractors -- seemed so unremarkable to the editorialists.
It has an end-of-the-republic feel to it.
"The purchase is opposed by the American and European allies because they view this military purchase from China as a risk. They are also disturbed that Turkey is not purchasing a system from them, because they have borne the cost of defending Turkey against a Syrian attack by stationing Patriot missile batteries on Turkish territory."
If purchased from the West, the missiles would be bought from a private defense contractor. But the "American and European allies" cited in the passage so identify themselves with the for-profit weapons manufacturers, that they consider themselves and their countries to be part of the "them" who are being cheated by having the weapons contract go elsewhere after "they" (presumably the taxpayers of the NATO countries and not Raytheon) helped pay to station Patriot missile batteries in Turkey.
Howard Dean used to say that in Washington, a "gaffe" is accidentally telling the truth. That appears to be what these security establishment types have committed, a gaffe.
It's a little troubling that this gaffe -- conflating the nation with private, wealthy, powerful and connected defense contractors -- seemed so unremarkable to the editorialists.
It has an end-of-the-republic feel to it.
1
Let's see. Turkey dutifully hosts 2000 american services members and their families for decades in incirlik airbase. Turkey paid with human lives during the korean war. Turkey took part in all nato campaigns in europe. Turkey is the only muslim country trying to stablise afghanistan in accordance with it's nato commitments. Turkey is the first muslim country to recognise the state of israel while it was being surrounded by maurading arab armies.
When in return turkey asked a simple request from its nato allies and its so called ally the united states o america to establish a no fly zone to protect the syrian population from the non stop murder and genocide from assad airforce bombardments, the answer was no. As a result, turkey has taken in 2 million refugees making it the world's largest refugee hosting country. Not only that but turkey has spent 6 billion of its own money to host it.
so the question becomes what did the west and nato expect when turkey for the last 4 years has been asking for assistance and support regarding the syrian tragedy unfolding on its borders only for the pleas to fall on deaf years?
I think turkey right now is seriously disillusioned with the west and nato in general. Turkey feels betrayed over syria and like every other aggrieved party feels natural to be withdrawn from the west and nato in general
When in return turkey asked a simple request from its nato allies and its so called ally the united states o america to establish a no fly zone to protect the syrian population from the non stop murder and genocide from assad airforce bombardments, the answer was no. As a result, turkey has taken in 2 million refugees making it the world's largest refugee hosting country. Not only that but turkey has spent 6 billion of its own money to host it.
so the question becomes what did the west and nato expect when turkey for the last 4 years has been asking for assistance and support regarding the syrian tragedy unfolding on its borders only for the pleas to fall on deaf years?
I think turkey right now is seriously disillusioned with the west and nato in general. Turkey feels betrayed over syria and like every other aggrieved party feels natural to be withdrawn from the west and nato in general
2
Turkey may indicate a growing trend since the basic national interests of the US and its NATO's partners tend to diverge. Some serious brainstorming in DC appears to be urgently required.
26
NATO has been looking for a mission ever since the end of the Cold War. That it has maintained as long as it has is the result of some effective alliance management and inertia. The Germans', upset by spying revelations, have a weakened commitment. The UK have done their analysis and no longer see the US as the special ally. And, now the Turks have finally decided that the Russians are far less of a threat than their neighbors to the south. All in all, NATO's demise looks increasingly likely.
5
If NATO keeps trying to expand its sphere of influence to Russia's borders, it will soon have a war to justify its continued existence.
1
Erdogan is having his fun playing in the tall grass now, and he'll continue to stay there until he realizes, hopefully not too late for us and him, that the cost of that fun is becoming too high to pay back.
2
Turkey is no longer the secular state envisioned by Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the modern Turkish state, but rather a Muslim dictatorship headed by a megalomaniac who has gone very far down a path toward total control of the country.
Erdogan is a racist, bigoted fanatic who believes that he should be the leader of the Arab and Muslim worlds, the head of a new modern-day caliphate. A very scary guy indeed, and a very dangerous ally. I couldn't agree more with this editorial board op-ed. As long as Erdogan runs Turkey, the country will never join with Europe.
Erdogan is a racist, bigoted fanatic who believes that he should be the leader of the Arab and Muslim worlds, the head of a new modern-day caliphate. A very scary guy indeed, and a very dangerous ally. I couldn't agree more with this editorial board op-ed. As long as Erdogan runs Turkey, the country will never join with Europe.
21
No matter what Turkey does, it will never join Europe. The EU has made that much clear.
If the EU had accepted Turkey decades ago, the Turks would not have turned toward Islamic fundamentalism, and Erdogan's AKP would not have been able to win any elections. The example of Turkey as a Western, Muslim-majority democracy would have pulled other Middle Eastern countries away from the grip of Islamic extremism. But inclusiveness and egalitarianism are not European traits. Having greatly contributed to the current mess in the Middle East by repeatedly rejecting Turkey, Europeans now hypocritically point to Turkey and say, "See? We were right not to admit Turkey into the EU." That's like leaving food on the kitchen counter for a week, and then saying, "See? I was right not to put spoiled food in the refrigerator."
If the EU had accepted Turkey decades ago, the Turks would not have turned toward Islamic fundamentalism, and Erdogan's AKP would not have been able to win any elections. The example of Turkey as a Western, Muslim-majority democracy would have pulled other Middle Eastern countries away from the grip of Islamic extremism. But inclusiveness and egalitarianism are not European traits. Having greatly contributed to the current mess in the Middle East by repeatedly rejecting Turkey, Europeans now hypocritically point to Turkey and say, "See? We were right not to admit Turkey into the EU." That's like leaving food on the kitchen counter for a week, and then saying, "See? I was right not to put spoiled food in the refrigerator."
1
A true alliance is based on both shared interests and shared principles such as democracy, individualism, free market and the rule of law in the case of the West. Alliances such as between US and Turkey since the 1950s are marriages of convenience that can easily break up in a world with new rising powers and diminished US influence. A reliable partner is one whose society shares your ideals too.
Compare Turkey with Greece and Israel in this regard.
Compare Turkey with Greece and Israel in this regard.
6
Oh yeah, I am sure Greece's NATO and other European neighbors are as thrilled to have an economic lead weight chained to their feet as we are to have an ally whose expansionist, might-makes-right Prime Minister disrespects our President in the two examples you ask us to compare.
2
Turkey drifting from NATO is not a big surprise, is it? first, the Washington-led military alliance is an acronym in search of a new mission statement since the end of the cold war.
Second, Turkey is an authoritarian democracy much closer ideologically to the Russian and Chinese models than liberal western democracies.
More importantly, Turkey's political leadership is caught up in a conundrum. An islamic nation integrated economically-militarily to the West in times of an American led warfare crusade against Islamic extremism.
As the Middle East war expands and spins out of control, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is running out of space to maneuver in such choppy and dangerous political waters.
At the end of the day, it remains to be seen whether economic and military interests will prevail over religion faith.
Second, Turkey is an authoritarian democracy much closer ideologically to the Russian and Chinese models than liberal western democracies.
More importantly, Turkey's political leadership is caught up in a conundrum. An islamic nation integrated economically-militarily to the West in times of an American led warfare crusade against Islamic extremism.
As the Middle East war expands and spins out of control, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is running out of space to maneuver in such choppy and dangerous political waters.
At the end of the day, it remains to be seen whether economic and military interests will prevail over religion faith.
5
This is another failure in the Obama foreign policy.
His responsibility, as President, is to build consensus and partnerships.
He has failed to do this in both domestic and foreign affairs.
His divisiveness and untrustworthiness has been historic.
His responsibility, as President, is to build consensus and partnerships.
He has failed to do this in both domestic and foreign affairs.
His divisiveness and untrustworthiness has been historic.
3
Some might think your comment is an empty scree but I disagree.
I'm sure you have a well developed thesis as to exactly what Obama should have done to cultivate a specific "consensus and partnership" with the Erdogan government and you are ready to share your illuminating and focused comments with all of us.
Do share!
I'm sure you have a well developed thesis as to exactly what Obama should have done to cultivate a specific "consensus and partnership" with the Erdogan government and you are ready to share your illuminating and focused comments with all of us.
Do share!
1
The Turks care deeply about their conflict with the Kurds, and rightfully so. Countless Kurdish terrorist attacks have killed many Turk civilians. We have grown ever closer to the Kurds since our invasion of Iraq. I'm sure our foreign policy decision makers know that balancing the two is difficult, and clearly they have given priority to befriending the Kurds. In the short run, that makes sense. In the long run, maybe not. I'm more worried about us writing off the Turks than vice versa.
5
"For months, the Western allies have pressured Turkey to close its porous border,"
If this is so easy lets do it first at the Mexico-USA border and give an example.
If this is so easy lets do it first at the Mexico-USA border and give an example.
9
It would not be difficult to lay minefields along the whole US /Mexican border. All it would take is the will to do so, something which our Dear Leader Obama lacks.
1
What a nonsensical article.
"American officials say they don't think Turkey will ever withdraw from NATO. Of course, such a move would be a catastrophic mistake"
Why?
American arrogance is blinding them that their Empire is slowly evaporating.
America's economy , in 1999, was 28% of the world's world's economy: today it is 19%.
"American officials say they don't think Turkey will ever withdraw from NATO. Of course, such a move would be a catastrophic mistake"
Why?
American arrogance is blinding them that their Empire is slowly evaporating.
America's economy , in 1999, was 28% of the world's world's economy: today it is 19%.
4
Is the subtext of this article really competition between arms manufacturers, and global control of resources?
Maybe if they would all just come out and say so, instead of talking about "autonomy," "partnerships" and "democracy," the ordinary person would have some idea what side to take.
Not that it would matter to their governments.
Maybe if they would all just come out and say so, instead of talking about "autonomy," "partnerships" and "democracy," the ordinary person would have some idea what side to take.
Not that it would matter to their governments.
3
Considering that a superpower like the U.S. has for decades been unable to halt the flow of illegal immigrants and dangerous drugs from coming across its southern borders, it hardly seems reasonable to criticize Turkey for failing to be able to fully stop all jihadist recruits from illegally crossing across it's 800 km border with Syria. Especially considering the fact that unlike Mexico, there is no governmental authority left on the Syrian side of the border for them to coordinate with.
5
Mr. Erdogan has a new best friend; Mr. Putin. These two plus Hungary's Mr. Orban and Egypt's Mr. Sisi are the new Macho men who will give the finger to the liberal and decadent West.
As far as NATO is concerned, it is my understanding that Turkey has pulled its weight. So, there should not be too many complaints.
It is, however, sad but true that Europe has for too long taken it for granted, that if things turn pear shape, the US will ride to the rescue. I hope that we in Europe will learn the right lessons from the war in Ukraine.
As far as NATO is concerned, it is my understanding that Turkey has pulled its weight. So, there should not be too many complaints.
It is, however, sad but true that Europe has for too long taken it for granted, that if things turn pear shape, the US will ride to the rescue. I hope that we in Europe will learn the right lessons from the war in Ukraine.
4
Not a fan of Erdogan. But, if Turkey is drifting away from Nato, buying Chinese defense systems, their behavior is hardly inexplicable. We were price uncompetitive, we demand crazy terms, and withhold the latest even from allies. China is selling the stuff at rock bottom prices. Who can resist? Ask Iran, who purchased a gleaming metro from China.
One would have to redefine what "long term" and "democracy" mean with some leeway, if we are to believe our attack on Saddam left the region more democratic in the long term. We essentially replaced a secular yet evil dictator with endless sectarian strife and conditions ripe for a caliphate. Our inaction in Syria has indirectly produced Syrian refugees begging on the streets of Istanbul. Meanwhile, Putin (if he is still alive) is testing Nato's resolve in northeastern Europe; he knows we will not defend (say) Latvia, if he were to attack. Nato is moments away from being rendered ineffectual.
Erdogan - spurned by the West, has pivoted east. We did not twist the arms necessary to include Turkey in EU. We should have. See the fury-scorned connection for further explanation. He is emulating Dubai (see new airport in Istanbul, ads in TIME magazine for Turkish Air), and relies on Saudi Arabian ideology and money. Nato does not factor much into his desire to create a East-European caliphate.
We would be foolish to bemoan what is happening, and ignore why this happened.
Kalidan
One would have to redefine what "long term" and "democracy" mean with some leeway, if we are to believe our attack on Saddam left the region more democratic in the long term. We essentially replaced a secular yet evil dictator with endless sectarian strife and conditions ripe for a caliphate. Our inaction in Syria has indirectly produced Syrian refugees begging on the streets of Istanbul. Meanwhile, Putin (if he is still alive) is testing Nato's resolve in northeastern Europe; he knows we will not defend (say) Latvia, if he were to attack. Nato is moments away from being rendered ineffectual.
Erdogan - spurned by the West, has pivoted east. We did not twist the arms necessary to include Turkey in EU. We should have. See the fury-scorned connection for further explanation. He is emulating Dubai (see new airport in Istanbul, ads in TIME magazine for Turkish Air), and relies on Saudi Arabian ideology and money. Nato does not factor much into his desire to create a East-European caliphate.
We would be foolish to bemoan what is happening, and ignore why this happened.
Kalidan
9
You left out what an undesirable creature Erdogan is. A thousand-room mansion for his family and friends? The dictator he has become using democratic means to get to power and demolish democracy the minute he gains power? The internet censoring only of the secular content? The getting rid of judges, prosecutors and police who were investigating the corruption charges against him? Putting more journalists in prison than Russia and China combined?
Yeah, the list goes on and on. Turkey's moving away from NATO is the least of their problem. Yes they have many more serious issues they are facing.
Yeah, the list goes on and on. Turkey's moving away from NATO is the least of their problem. Yes they have many more serious issues they are facing.
1
Turkey's political shift from secular Generals preserving Ataturk's legacy of modernization through Westernization to the populist Erdogan championing a muscular projection of Islamist power equates to its de facto departure from NATO. This is no surprise. It is reminiscent of the not too long ago role of the Ottomans as ambivalent interlocutors between between East and West.
5
Don't be so harsh with the Sultan wannabe, Erdogan. The Muslim Brotherhood promised him a non elected and lifetime appointment to the Caliphate. Or was that Qatar who also employed the MB and everyone else willing to do their dirty work?
Erdogan is probably the most opportunistic politician of our time. But his problem is that he seems to always bet on the wrong horse in the race. That and being the godfather of Turkish corruption. Jailing hundreds of high ranking police people for suspecting they wanted to expose his corruption ring is the ultimate model of democracy. Now that he lives in his $600 plus palace he requires that all his meals be lab tested for poison. Who else did that? Come on you know.
Erdogan is probably the most opportunistic politician of our time. But his problem is that he seems to always bet on the wrong horse in the race. That and being the godfather of Turkish corruption. Jailing hundreds of high ranking police people for suspecting they wanted to expose his corruption ring is the ultimate model of democracy. Now that he lives in his $600 plus palace he requires that all his meals be lab tested for poison. Who else did that? Come on you know.
5
Oops, you gave the wrong number, it's $600 million with 1,000 rooms.
2
It is well known that many European governments did not stop its citizens from leaving for Jihad. They even encouraged some to get rid of them (http://www1.wdr.de/daserste/monitor/extras/monitorpresse-isis100.html)(h.... Most of the time they don't even inform Turkey about the arrival of these Jihadis to Turkey. Yet they expect Turkey to stop all of them from going to Syria. Do they provide funds for this? No. Do they provide considerable funds for the millions of Syrians (including Asyrian Christians, Kurds and Yazidis) living in Turkey? No. Do they bear the cost of the terror that will hit Turkey if Turkey start fighting ISIS much harder? No. So this alliance seems pretty one sided to me.
About the Chinese missiles and Russian nuclear reactor. Chinese agreed to transfer almost all the technology to Turkey and manufactur most parts in Turkey. Russians also transfer the nuclear technology to Turkey. Regardless of the current government if our American and European friends love us so much do they really trust Turkey enough for it to have its own missiles and nuclear technology or do they want Turkey to rely on the West for these technologies forever?
Finally about the Sanctions against Russia. The rich EU nations (like Germany) should first do their part against Russia then ask a much poorer nation like Turkey to resist temptations of cheap Russian gas or a lucrative gas pipeline.
About the Chinese missiles and Russian nuclear reactor. Chinese agreed to transfer almost all the technology to Turkey and manufactur most parts in Turkey. Russians also transfer the nuclear technology to Turkey. Regardless of the current government if our American and European friends love us so much do they really trust Turkey enough for it to have its own missiles and nuclear technology or do they want Turkey to rely on the West for these technologies forever?
Finally about the Sanctions against Russia. The rich EU nations (like Germany) should first do their part against Russia then ask a much poorer nation like Turkey to resist temptations of cheap Russian gas or a lucrative gas pipeline.
6
"For months, the Western allies have pressured Turkey to close its porous border"
Yep, "close the border" but that's just takes a lot of money spending, it is a serious loss to the economy of the state, quite logically that Turkey tried to postponed the decision. The Western Allies did not even think to allocate money for the implementation of this requirement.
Yep, "close the border" but that's just takes a lot of money spending, it is a serious loss to the economy of the state, quite logically that Turkey tried to postponed the decision. The Western Allies did not even think to allocate money for the implementation of this requirement.
3
Turkish Government cannot legally deny entry or passage to someone who holds a valid EU passport, has not violated the law during their stay in the country, does not appear on a watch list or in the Interpol database, period. Some of the people that passed through were known to have criminal/radical records in their home country and yet were not entered into the databases and had valid passports...
1
In times of great change, the worse thing that a nation can do is to turn to the 'right'. Even though the uncertainties of transitions like the one that we are currently experiencing (aka the advent of "the 2nd Machine Age') may generate fear, and the urge to withdraw, retrench, regress, and double down on yesterday, that is ultimately the worst answer.
Anal retention just defers the inevitable explosion. The shift to the right will only unleash pain, suffering, and the ugliest side of human nature pitted against itself.
Anal retention just defers the inevitable explosion. The shift to the right will only unleash pain, suffering, and the ugliest side of human nature pitted against itself.
4
The Russian strategy appears to be a future buildup of naval forces and facilities at Sevastopol in Crimea, recently annexed by Russia with of course the fighting in Eastern Ukraine designed to assure land access to Crimea on the Black sea. Making nice with Turkey would assure easy transit through the straits of Dardenelle between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea because it is now looking likely that Russia will lose its mediterranean naval base on the Syrian coast should Assad fall. Remember that Russia's north coast ports are largely unusable much of the year while worldwide access through the Mediterranean is a desirable thing to Russia. Additionally, the Chinese have become close to Russia owing to the proposed gas pipeline to China. Only nations with long term security goals would embark on such a project, hence, the Chinese missile systems Turkey wants is a very bad sign of gradual alignment militarily between Russia and Turkey.
1
Would withdrawal from NATO be a "catastrophic mistake" for Turkey? Or would it represent an independent nation's decision to get out from under and no longer support US global hegemony and the increasingly dangerous confrontation with Russia over Ukraine. It was also Turkey that attempted to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza and was attacked for its troubles.
NATO is obviously the Cold War creation and creature of the US, by definition opposed to NEUTRALITY, here Turkey, but part of the larger US-EU mindset of, for us or against us, no middle ground! The Russian pipeline, the Chinese defense system, utter blaspheme from a US perspective.
One does not have to agree with Erdogan on all his policies, foreign and domestic, to see the growing resentment of nations being dragged into a great-powers conflict carrying the possibility of nuclear annihilation.
If America were not so aggressive, e.g., Obama's Pacific-first strategy against China, support of neo-Nazis in Ukraine, drone assassination as his weapon-of-choice in Pakistan, perhaps, just perhaps, Turkey would not be reacting to NATO, and just perhaps, other countries would have greater respect for America in international politics.
This is a new era. The world structure is becoming decentralized. America cannot have it all its own way, i.e., unilateral dominance in military, political, ideological, and, of course, trade terms. Time to let go a bit; let others breathe--for now, breathe they will.
NATO is obviously the Cold War creation and creature of the US, by definition opposed to NEUTRALITY, here Turkey, but part of the larger US-EU mindset of, for us or against us, no middle ground! The Russian pipeline, the Chinese defense system, utter blaspheme from a US perspective.
One does not have to agree with Erdogan on all his policies, foreign and domestic, to see the growing resentment of nations being dragged into a great-powers conflict carrying the possibility of nuclear annihilation.
If America were not so aggressive, e.g., Obama's Pacific-first strategy against China, support of neo-Nazis in Ukraine, drone assassination as his weapon-of-choice in Pakistan, perhaps, just perhaps, Turkey would not be reacting to NATO, and just perhaps, other countries would have greater respect for America in international politics.
This is a new era. The world structure is becoming decentralized. America cannot have it all its own way, i.e., unilateral dominance in military, political, ideological, and, of course, trade terms. Time to let go a bit; let others breathe--for now, breathe they will.
17
"...let others breathe--for now, breathe they will." Indeed, but the air will be quite fetid with the stench of Islamic fundamentalism, at least in Turkey. Given the amount of aid the US offers Turkey, I'd love to see them off the payroll, and this for all time; for 2015, the amount requested for aid is $4,834,000.00
For which we get.....what?
http://www.foreignassistance.gov/web/rgaintro.aspx
For which we get.....what?
http://www.foreignassistance.gov/web/rgaintro.aspx
1
Excellent comment! Thank you! Why can't more American see this so clearly?
1
Good point!
The US formed and is the backbone of NATO, whose sole purpose is to confront Russian imperialism.
Now, the US is also drifting from NATO, as is Europe. The Western world will come to regret this neglect of their interests.
Now, the US is also drifting from NATO, as is Europe. The Western world will come to regret this neglect of their interests.
8
"whose sole purpose is to confront Russian imperialism"
No, its purpose is to defend our joint interests. Those were sometimes put as keeping the Russians out of Europe, the Americans in, and Germany down.
When NATO was formed, the only threat was from the USSR. It was a simpler world. Now the USSR is gone, and its Warsaw Pact are mostly in NATO. But we still have joint interests to defend.
There can be no general war among European nations. They are all NATO allies. They can't do it. None have tried. After the horrors of Euopean wars for centuries, we've gone a long time without. Let's keep it that way.
No, its purpose is to defend our joint interests. Those were sometimes put as keeping the Russians out of Europe, the Americans in, and Germany down.
When NATO was formed, the only threat was from the USSR. It was a simpler world. Now the USSR is gone, and its Warsaw Pact are mostly in NATO. But we still have joint interests to defend.
There can be no general war among European nations. They are all NATO allies. They can't do it. None have tried. After the horrors of Euopean wars for centuries, we've gone a long time without. Let's keep it that way.
11
RR, The western world wants no part of some confrontation with Russia on its border. The US gave it to them, Russia has no imperial intentions compared to the hegemonic intentions of the US. Turkey has no interest in getting dragged into a spat with Russia because they know that being on the border, means that they will likely lose. NATO needs 5 to 10 members to just up and drop out of that silly cold war organization.
3
Last time I checked, Turkey was a democratic nation, one of two in the region. And their military spending meets NATO requirements, which can't be said for most of our allies, such as Germany, France and Italy.
The Arab Spring has been an unmitigated disaster. The Middle East is a train wreck and the US played a major role in causing it. Turkey has so much chaos so close to home, of course they are going to look to their own interests, rather than to their NATO allies.
In many ways Europe looks again like 1939 and the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are Poland. NATO is weak and unprepared for war.
The Arab Spring has been an unmitigated disaster. The Middle East is a train wreck and the US played a major role in causing it. Turkey has so much chaos so close to home, of course they are going to look to their own interests, rather than to their NATO allies.
In many ways Europe looks again like 1939 and the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are Poland. NATO is weak and unprepared for war.
94
Check again...
Indeed. It is not a good time to throw the Turks to the wolves lest they be bitten and begin to grow hair and fangs, develop the Jihadist desire the taste of fresh European and American flesh.
I'd add to Michael's' post that NATO is an aggressive, militaristic, incompetent anachronism, long since departed from its origin in defending Western Europe against the supposed threat from the Soviet UInion
2
Turkey should dump NATO. They do not need the alliance, and should become a neutral country. It has no need to fear Russia, and NATO does little to take on the ISIS folks.
24
And they should "dump" the 4 billion dollars in US aid for 2015.
Turkey helped the Western World by allowing them to install listening stations along its Black Sea Coast during the Cold War. She helped to check the Communist threat which was our greatest concern at that time. If only USA would listen to General de Gaul and before the Vietnam War and Turkish politicians before the invasion of Iraq there would not be a Vietnam and Middle East would be in peace now.
3
The Turks realize that the future lies East, not West. Days of Western hegemony are over.
3
Yes Turkey is all bad. Let us look at the reality of what happened in the last 15 or so years. Erdogan became the leader of his party in 2001 and the Prime Minister in 2003. Turkey had been a major player in Europe since 1949. An application for a candidate for full membership to European Union was approved in 1999. It took additional five years for negotiation to get started. Yes Turkey is a vital part of NATO and covers the southern flank, but European Union’s handling of Turkey’s membership has been a big hurdle in Turkey’s relationship with the West.
Although we have not handled Turkey with due respect but still Mr. Erdogan is behaving like he already is the head of the Ottoman Empire. His food is eaten by security staff before he eats anything etc.
Turkey alone is not responsible for its behavior re ISIS; we asked them to provide transit facility for the Intelligence/volunteers/rebels who were going to Syria through the long porous borders into Syria. Now when the Al-Qaeda morphed in ISIS, it brings to Turkey a benefit, similar to the good and the bad Taliban that Pakistan have. They protect one and fight the other. ISIS and Turkey has the same ideology as the Saudis/Wahhabi, and Muslim Brotherhood.
Turkey wants to be a major player in NATO and will not drift away from NATO, although they are buying Chinese products on the cheap; they are also not going to put all eggs in the basket that they are not truly trusting anymore.
Although we have not handled Turkey with due respect but still Mr. Erdogan is behaving like he already is the head of the Ottoman Empire. His food is eaten by security staff before he eats anything etc.
Turkey alone is not responsible for its behavior re ISIS; we asked them to provide transit facility for the Intelligence/volunteers/rebels who were going to Syria through the long porous borders into Syria. Now when the Al-Qaeda morphed in ISIS, it brings to Turkey a benefit, similar to the good and the bad Taliban that Pakistan have. They protect one and fight the other. ISIS and Turkey has the same ideology as the Saudis/Wahhabi, and Muslim Brotherhood.
Turkey wants to be a major player in NATO and will not drift away from NATO, although they are buying Chinese products on the cheap; they are also not going to put all eggs in the basket that they are not truly trusting anymore.
6
I am afraid that the "West" (including both the U.S and European NATO allies) would like Turkey to ally with its interests in the case of NATO and do what the 'West' asks. In other words, Turkey should obey and go with the West when the West needs Turkey. At other times, the West (in this case Europe/EU) is perfectly happy to push Turkey away, and find many excuses to deny and block its EU membership bid. The U.S follows its own interests in its relations with Turkey just like Turkey does. In fact all of the above has historically has been the case, just with different actors.
8
Seems to me that Turkey made several good faith attempts to join the EU. While there were some objections, which seemed more based in prejudice than in politics and economics. Looks like NATO is paying a price for EU intransigence. Ironically, it was Germany that played a major role in keeping Turkey out of the EU. Whether Turkish politics would have been different if they had been accepted into the EU or not, we will never know.
9
Turkey was unable to present any reasonable accountability in terms of human rights and was seen as unfit for EU membership. Simple as that. The prejudice you refer to is one against human rights abuse; a prejudice we all should share.
Turkey’s interest lies in a strategy that will extend its influence. In a different time NATO membership provided that benefit.
The situation has changed. Turkey now has more leeway in strengthening its position in Central Asia among independent Turkic nations, and republics of the RF.
The USA failed to deliver on EU accession, so it now has less leverage over Turkey than it did before. Plus, their ethnic cousins won’t give Turkey heartburn about being a non-Christian nation and thus a priori not qualified to join the EU.
Russia now has more to offer the Turks as it holds the keys to access to CA and is playing a home game.
The notion that the USA could challenge Russia on its home turf is a pipe dream. Cold reason leads to no other conclusion. Everyone knows this except a few deluded advocates in Washington.
Diplomacy is about projecting an image that serves one’s interests. The canard about “a defensive pact of democratic countries” has as much credibility as changing the name of the War Department to the Department of Defense. It’s just cosmetic embellishment of cynical calculus. When it becomes expedient, NATO will accept the Saudi Arabian despots into the fold without batting an eye.
Turkey is acting in accordance with its perceived interests. It would be remiss were it to view its interests as identical to those of any other country. It is idiocy along the lines of the letter of the 47 to attempt to persuade Turkey to the contrary.
The situation has changed. Turkey now has more leeway in strengthening its position in Central Asia among independent Turkic nations, and republics of the RF.
The USA failed to deliver on EU accession, so it now has less leverage over Turkey than it did before. Plus, their ethnic cousins won’t give Turkey heartburn about being a non-Christian nation and thus a priori not qualified to join the EU.
Russia now has more to offer the Turks as it holds the keys to access to CA and is playing a home game.
The notion that the USA could challenge Russia on its home turf is a pipe dream. Cold reason leads to no other conclusion. Everyone knows this except a few deluded advocates in Washington.
Diplomacy is about projecting an image that serves one’s interests. The canard about “a defensive pact of democratic countries” has as much credibility as changing the name of the War Department to the Department of Defense. It’s just cosmetic embellishment of cynical calculus. When it becomes expedient, NATO will accept the Saudi Arabian despots into the fold without batting an eye.
Turkey is acting in accordance with its perceived interests. It would be remiss were it to view its interests as identical to those of any other country. It is idiocy along the lines of the letter of the 47 to attempt to persuade Turkey to the contrary.
12
No, Turkey will not withdraw from NATO; it will ignore NATO, it will frustrate NATO, but it will hold onto the safety of the alliance ... all the time insisting that it is doing "the Crusaders" a great service. However, that is how Erdogan treats Turkey as well.
3
Study the history of the Ottoman Empire -- how it came about and how it worked under the hood at its zenith, before the industrial revolution equipped Western Europe to first challenge it, then overpower it -- and you'll understand the game the Turks are playing; what's going on here.
1
EU is falling apart and NATO will fall apart. Both institutions will be history within 10 years.
5
I have always been amazed at Turkey's balking at repeated requests to use it's air bases to conduct sorties or to train Iraqi soldiers to fight ISIS. Why?
As the board has correctly stated they have essentially done nothing to close their border. And if ISIS begins to make inroads in Turkey I believe their whole tenor will change dramatically as will thei willingness for NATO forces to station there.
Does NATO membership stipulate very specific behaviors or actions expected of it's members? I do not know but if so why does Turkey ignore repeated requests for assistance. We give them assistance and have for years so their detached and oblivious attitude belies reason
It's a fine line. How hard do you push them to comply with requests for assistance when it appears that philosophically they are indifferent. We have to respect the sovereignty of Turkey but at the same time they cannot continue to stand on the sidelines. It's just not realistic
As the board has correctly stated they have essentially done nothing to close their border. And if ISIS begins to make inroads in Turkey I believe their whole tenor will change dramatically as will thei willingness for NATO forces to station there.
Does NATO membership stipulate very specific behaviors or actions expected of it's members? I do not know but if so why does Turkey ignore repeated requests for assistance. We give them assistance and have for years so their detached and oblivious attitude belies reason
It's a fine line. How hard do you push them to comply with requests for assistance when it appears that philosophically they are indifferent. We have to respect the sovereignty of Turkey but at the same time they cannot continue to stand on the sidelines. It's just not realistic
1
"Public opinion polls show that the Turks don’t consider ISIS a primary threat, and Mr. Erdogan is more concerned with opposing Kurdish autonomy within Syria and with bringing down the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad."
As a child and meeting my best friend in grade school Mary. Her mom was from Greece and her dad from Turkey who served in WWI as a cook in the U.S. military.
What I do remember from our conversation back then it is almost like deja vu now with ISIL and the Syrian National Coalition at war or if not war fighting for those who are in the crosshairs.
Mary's dad said to Mary that you can't trust Turkey. Now coming from someone who was born there says to me that maybe there is a problem with trusting Turkey's government now. Are they two-faced? Probably. Are they going to stay with NATO? Probably not. But that depends on if it's worth their while.
As a child and meeting my best friend in grade school Mary. Her mom was from Greece and her dad from Turkey who served in WWI as a cook in the U.S. military.
What I do remember from our conversation back then it is almost like deja vu now with ISIL and the Syrian National Coalition at war or if not war fighting for those who are in the crosshairs.
Mary's dad said to Mary that you can't trust Turkey. Now coming from someone who was born there says to me that maybe there is a problem with trusting Turkey's government now. Are they two-faced? Probably. Are they going to stay with NATO? Probably not. But that depends on if it's worth their while.
3
I think that Turkey's position is more understandable if it is put into historic context. Turkey straddles both Europe and Asia and has long seen itself as occupying a kind of middle ground between the West and the East. Greece and Turkey were brought into NATO together (thus bring Turkey firmly into the Western fold) largely as a result of the Truman Doctrine (to oppose Soviet expansion into Eastern Europe). If the United States can no longer articulate a threat like the USSR (and let's face it, threats like Iran do not rise to that level), then the rationale for Turkey to stay within NATO is no longer so obvious. Thus you have policies like "no trouble with neighbors." Having Turkey in NATO certainly serves Western interests (it is the only majority-Muslim member, it occupies a crucial geographic position, etc.), but we should not be surprised--especially since it has been rebuffed from EU membership for so long--that it is questioning whether it really belongs in the Western camp.
54
and it really doesn't, so they should go their own way...
Turkey is not a good ally. We should toss them out of NATO post haste. They are tacitly supporting ISIL. Erdogan is consolidating his power and will end up dictator for life. The sooner we realize this, the better.
Thr Kurds on the other hand are our most reliable ally. They put their lives on the line to destroy ISIL. Furthermore they treat women with respect and train them as fighters in the current conflict. We need to support these people with all we have got. They are not terrorists and need to have their own country. If we help them we will have more reliable ally in the Middle East. Currently we have none.
Thr Kurds on the other hand are our most reliable ally. They put their lives on the line to destroy ISIL. Furthermore they treat women with respect and train them as fighters in the current conflict. We need to support these people with all we have got. They are not terrorists and need to have their own country. If we help them we will have more reliable ally in the Middle East. Currently we have none.
135
In this situation it is needful to remember the axiom:"Keep your friends close-keep your enemies closer". The Kurds are a decednt enough bunch and we ought to be nice to them. But to dump the turks in favor of the kurds is just wasteful and will only lead to resentment--the Turks have thought themselves deserving of becoming "Europeans" but, once refussed, theiur resentment has caused the countryside to become angry and resentful and as a result they are playing with Islamic absolutist fire. Best we be nearby in the event of conflagration or the next Caliphate may again be in Turkey.
Turkey took a stand against the murder of a dozen or so citizens in international waters, at the hands of the Israelis, and what did the US and NATO do about it? Nothing. The US should have cut aid to the State of Israel over the matter. Why should Turkey trust the US?????
2
Turkey and other Sunni states have less to worry about ISIS than Iran as ISIS is a Sunni organization. In fact, Turkey and other Sunni states may have little to worry about Sunni extremist groups: ISIS, Al Qaeda, and Taliban and may be providing resources, intelligence, and shelter to them.
NATO may not be an innocent party in the drift that is evident in Turkey. People in the region are very aware of the incursion of NATO and European interests into the former Soviet States in violation to understandings and agreements made with the "Russian" power as the Soviet Union was dissolving that guaranteed neutrality and non interference in the former Soviet states. Distrust of the west is not confined to Russia in many of these states and states like Turkey.
"Breaking up" with NATO may be prevented if we acknowledge our mistakes in over-reaching, our war with Iraq which stupidly destabilized the entire region.
NATO may not be an innocent party in the drift that is evident in Turkey. People in the region are very aware of the incursion of NATO and European interests into the former Soviet States in violation to understandings and agreements made with the "Russian" power as the Soviet Union was dissolving that guaranteed neutrality and non interference in the former Soviet states. Distrust of the west is not confined to Russia in many of these states and states like Turkey.
"Breaking up" with NATO may be prevented if we acknowledge our mistakes in over-reaching, our war with Iraq which stupidly destabilized the entire region.
1
It appears that Turkey has already withdrawn from NATO. All that is lacking is a formal goodbye.
Turkey is playing us. Everyone in the Middle East is playing us. We ask Turkey to close their borders and they close them a little. They then respond by saying that they are doing all they can but don't have the resources to do anymore. This is classic pretend cooperation. They do just enough to create an appearance of compliance. Then the guards look the other way.
Turks don't consider ISIS a primary threat? Really? Sounds like a you don't hurt us and we won't hurt you deal. "Us" does not apparently include the Yazidis or Kurds or Christians, only Sunni Turks that want to get rid of Assad.
Just like every other nation in the region, Turkey is not going to participate in any risky military venture that benefits another nation. They want the US and NATO to come to their aid if needed but don't call them if trouble breaks out. Trouble has already broken out.
Erdogan is a Putin clone. He is making Turkey into what he wants it to be, not what NATO needs it to be. We should recognize this reality and kick Turkey out of NATO. They have Russia, China, the their non-problem ISIS fighters to keep them safe. We have nothing to lose because Turkey has already left the building. The Middle East continues to break apart.
Turkey is playing us. Everyone in the Middle East is playing us. We ask Turkey to close their borders and they close them a little. They then respond by saying that they are doing all they can but don't have the resources to do anymore. This is classic pretend cooperation. They do just enough to create an appearance of compliance. Then the guards look the other way.
Turks don't consider ISIS a primary threat? Really? Sounds like a you don't hurt us and we won't hurt you deal. "Us" does not apparently include the Yazidis or Kurds or Christians, only Sunni Turks that want to get rid of Assad.
Just like every other nation in the region, Turkey is not going to participate in any risky military venture that benefits another nation. They want the US and NATO to come to their aid if needed but don't call them if trouble breaks out. Trouble has already broken out.
Erdogan is a Putin clone. He is making Turkey into what he wants it to be, not what NATO needs it to be. We should recognize this reality and kick Turkey out of NATO. They have Russia, China, the their non-problem ISIS fighters to keep them safe. We have nothing to lose because Turkey has already left the building. The Middle East continues to break apart.
156
It sounds so easy. But as soon as any US politician attempted to "dump Turkey" the opposition-either one-would jump on the concept and ca;lim that this was new isolationism or "weakness" being telegraphed by the US to foreign nations-that we were inviting the new Soviet Imperialists to enter into the soft unberbelly of Europe-it doesn't matter if they were a thousand miles away--it is the fear mongering and the name calling.
We are stuck with our allies and our enemies for the time being. We have been stuck with dumb Islamic savagery in the Med since before the establishment of the US. We couldn't stop it then and we are not going to stop the local revoltionism now, by leaving the arabs/Turks/Islamists to whoever makes the fairest promises.
We are stuck with our allies and our enemies for the time being. We have been stuck with dumb Islamic savagery in the Med since before the establishment of the US. We couldn't stop it then and we are not going to stop the local revoltionism now, by leaving the arabs/Turks/Islamists to whoever makes the fairest promises.
"Everyone in the Middle East is playing us."
We do not play, we just invade and destroy. Erdogan showed great wisdom not to get involved in the Middle-East quagmire. For good reason. Arabs kicked out Turks from there during the WWI with the kelp of their allies, British and France. Now they are bombed by them.
We do not play, we just invade and destroy. Erdogan showed great wisdom not to get involved in the Middle-East quagmire. For good reason. Arabs kicked out Turks from there during the WWI with the kelp of their allies, British and France. Now they are bombed by them.
3
Turkey is not the middle east, not Arab. It is much more dictatorial than it was. Still, in terms of international relations, it seems to be doing what its people want it to. Turkish international priorities are different from American or western European international priorities. That's the way it is. We don't have to do anything about it. We just have to be aware of it and act accordingly.
5
When American officials claim that they, "...don’t think Turkey will ever withdraw from NATO" they are totally correct. Why? Under the terms of the treaty, other NATO countries are bound to come to Turkey's defense if attacked. Under the timorous and vacillating guidance of the NATO "senior partner" (the US), Turkey gets the best of both worlds: by remaining in the alliance, the Erdogan government can opt out of or stymie any effort they don't like whilst knowing full-well that EU member countries will abide by the terms of the agreement and provide any necessary assistance. Again why? If they don't the alliance falls apart.
This is yet another example of the US being outmaneuvered by the clever merchants in the Turkish souk. It's gone on for years and it will probably continue to do so.
This is yet another example of the US being outmaneuvered by the clever merchants in the Turkish souk. It's gone on for years and it will probably continue to do so.
2
Why wait. Throw them out. NATO is a defense organization of democracy. Turkey, under a fascist dictator, has made its choice clear.
6
why does nato even exist? Just to combat the russians?
6
So the US could have a fig-leaf for its military policies towards the East, yes.
1
Good question?
Turkey does not agree with the US ideas for fighting the Islamic State. That does not make Turkey wrong nor a bad ally.
Consider the Iraq War. Turkey disagreed with that too. If only we'd listened to that good ally that time. The good allies there were not Tony Blair poodling to Bush, nor the Israeli leaders demanding the Iraq War as soon as possible.
Now Turkey insists that US ideas about Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites are simply foolish. Based on past success of US ideas on these things, the Turks could well be right again. Once again, they won't go to war on what they say is a fool's errand. Well, Libya and Syria and Iraq are all going so well, who's the fool?
As for "integrated defense" they ask "integrated with who?" The answer they reject is "integrated with Israel" (NOT a NATO ally) which would be using that integrated defense to attack Iran and mess with the Kurdish situation contrary to Turkey's opinion of its interests, and maybe kill more Turks too. Of course they won't integrate with that, it'd be foolish.
There is much about Turkey for real concern. Their human rights and democracy are now far better than when they were "good allies," but still far worse than it ought to be. Let's think about that too -- our allies are "good" when they go along with our foolishness, but when they object to our foolishness then their improvments are proof of how bad they are. See Egypt's dictatorships for the example, something else to which Turkey rightly objects despite us.
Consider the Iraq War. Turkey disagreed with that too. If only we'd listened to that good ally that time. The good allies there were not Tony Blair poodling to Bush, nor the Israeli leaders demanding the Iraq War as soon as possible.
Now Turkey insists that US ideas about Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites are simply foolish. Based on past success of US ideas on these things, the Turks could well be right again. Once again, they won't go to war on what they say is a fool's errand. Well, Libya and Syria and Iraq are all going so well, who's the fool?
As for "integrated defense" they ask "integrated with who?" The answer they reject is "integrated with Israel" (NOT a NATO ally) which would be using that integrated defense to attack Iran and mess with the Kurdish situation contrary to Turkey's opinion of its interests, and maybe kill more Turks too. Of course they won't integrate with that, it'd be foolish.
There is much about Turkey for real concern. Their human rights and democracy are now far better than when they were "good allies," but still far worse than it ought to be. Let's think about that too -- our allies are "good" when they go along with our foolishness, but when they object to our foolishness then their improvments are proof of how bad they are. See Egypt's dictatorships for the example, something else to which Turkey rightly objects despite us.
55
The problem is that opposing another party's "foolishness" doesn't imply that one's own policies are wise. Another way of looking at it is that Turkey's foreign policy, especially over, say, the last five years, has exacerbated the overall situation in the Middle East, which is not to say that US policy doesn't merit perhaps the lion's share of the blame, especially for occasioning the rise of ISIS. But it seems that there was a time when grownups in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Ankara could quietly urge counterparts in our government against their most egregious intentions. Now those days are long gone. Instead, AK Party's frankly ahistorical delusions of Ottoman grandeur have inspired its vision of attaining some species of regional hegemony, which is all the more troubling in a region with no lack of would-be shots-callers (the US, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel). So while it's well and good to support a state's moral and sovereign right to oppose US policy, acknowledging that right shouldn't be the end of the discussion, nor should it divert the discussion solely to US mistakes. Turkey's foreign policy should also be assessed in its own right.
1
Dear Mark,
The situation can not be explained much better than your words. Turkey should and hopefully will not go into a war because its allies like to see him so...
The situation can not be explained much better than your words. Turkey should and hopefully will not go into a war because its allies like to see him so...
2
this is by far the most sensible comment here, thank you
2
Turkey with 80 million people is the natural great power in the area. The West treats Kurdistan with 6 million and Israel with 8 million as the great powers. EU will not treat it as Europe. Turkey is offered nothing, but is told it should be a gracious satellite. Russia has been treated the same way. One should not be surprised at the results.
59
As a Turk I have to admit you are 100% correct. And add to that :
- We protected West's east borders during Cold War and what we got in return?
- We do not need to protect USA interests, we are a sovereign nation and therefore if the USA do not want us to buy Chinese missile systems then give the same advantages they gave and take the contract (like transfer of knowledge)
- USA turned a blind-eye to Sunni sect and now started to dance with Shias, you should see what would come like dramatic changes by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc.
- USA ruined Iraq and quess whose economy damaged most? What we got in return, USA signed a FTA with EU to bypass Turkish Customs (We are included in Customs Union with EU)
- We protected West's east borders during Cold War and what we got in return?
- We do not need to protect USA interests, we are a sovereign nation and therefore if the USA do not want us to buy Chinese missile systems then give the same advantages they gave and take the contract (like transfer of knowledge)
- USA turned a blind-eye to Sunni sect and now started to dance with Shias, you should see what would come like dramatic changes by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc.
- USA ruined Iraq and quess whose economy damaged most? What we got in return, USA signed a FTA with EU to bypass Turkish Customs (We are included in Customs Union with EU)
3
Turks are Turkish speaking, not a natural hegemon of Arabic or Persian speakers.
There are about 80 mill Iranians, about 50 mill ethnic Persian, maybe 5 mill Kurds.
Of the 77 million Turks, maybe 60 mill are ethnic Turks, about 12 mill are kurds. There are about another 20 mill kurds in the region. Thirty million Kurds, more than 8 million.
There are about ninety million Egyptians.
Just saying stuff doesn't make it so, not even in America.
The innocent Turkey story is nonsense. Erdogan's seeks hegemony. Fine. Those who don't like it should pursue their interests just as Turkey does. And, Erdogan's is a fool in how he pursues Hegemony. Bush wasn't the only one you know.
There are about 80 mill Iranians, about 50 mill ethnic Persian, maybe 5 mill Kurds.
Of the 77 million Turks, maybe 60 mill are ethnic Turks, about 12 mill are kurds. There are about another 20 mill kurds in the region. Thirty million Kurds, more than 8 million.
There are about ninety million Egyptians.
Just saying stuff doesn't make it so, not even in America.
The innocent Turkey story is nonsense. Erdogan's seeks hegemony. Fine. Those who don't like it should pursue their interests just as Turkey does. And, Erdogan's is a fool in how he pursues Hegemony. Bush wasn't the only one you know.
2
Sorry to clue you in on things but there are 20 million Kurds in the middle east and they are reproducing at a rate far higher than that of the Turks. In any case, your analysis is absolutely incorrect. Only Turkey has a treaty with the Western Powers that treats an attack upon Turkish soil as an attack against Nato. Israel has fought numerous wars. Yes they have received western equipment but western boots on the ground, no. The Kurds? Give me a break, the U.S. has opposed and continues to oppose statehood for them.
Turkey frankly does not belong to NATO, it would be much better for the alliance to part ways with this increasingly Islamist regime which is not a reliable political and military partner.
30
"Reliable" does not mean "obedient."
Turkey is in a difficult spot, and it thinks we are making a mess of things.
It is pretty clear that we ARE making a mess of things.
Perhaps Turkey isn't the problem. Our making a mess of things is the problem.
Turkey is in a difficult spot, and it thinks we are making a mess of things.
It is pretty clear that we ARE making a mess of things.
Perhaps Turkey isn't the problem. Our making a mess of things is the problem.
32
So if we back away (which we should anyway) Turks and Kurds will get on well together? The memories of Armenians will be assuaged?
1
Turkey, because of its location, is always walking a tightrope. They will never become 100% Western, especially if they are kept out of the European Union.
11
After 3 decades of the US pretending that Iran didn't exist, what do you expect? The Taliban, al-Qaida, ISIS, and now Turkey mis-behaving. The diagnosis for all this is the same. Iran must be brought back into the fold.
22
Turkey is moving toward the Arab Middle East governmental model. In a very few short years it will be a full-on totalitarian nation. That is reality, deal with it.
21
This should come as no surprise. Erdogan has been less than loyal for quite a few years. His actions at Gezi park should have been a tip off. Then there has been his suppression of the press, his arrest of opponents, his close friendship and support of Morsi, to say nothing of his refusal to allow the US to use Incirlik air base.
I am not sure why it has taken so long to come to this conclusion, unless people simply refused to face the facts in front of them. AKP is just another form of the Muslim Brotherhood. Surely his covert support for ISIS and its forerunner, Jabat Al Nusra, should have been a tip off. But no one wanted to see these facts as he was anti-Assad and people who should know better, accepted that fact as an indication of his support.
He played NATO for fools and now they get to pay the price for looking the other way.
I am not sure why it has taken so long to come to this conclusion, unless people simply refused to face the facts in front of them. AKP is just another form of the Muslim Brotherhood. Surely his covert support for ISIS and its forerunner, Jabat Al Nusra, should have been a tip off. But no one wanted to see these facts as he was anti-Assad and people who should know better, accepted that fact as an indication of his support.
He played NATO for fools and now they get to pay the price for looking the other way.
41
"his close friendship and support of Morsi"
At the time, that was the US position too. It was the US that changed, not Turkey, and Egypt is a mess from what the US now supports there.
At the time, that was the US position too. It was the US that changed, not Turkey, and Egypt is a mess from what the US now supports there.
10
Turkey's drift from NATO may be due to Turkey's reaction to Europe's refusal to allow Turkey into the EU.
12
This could all have played out differently had the EU welcomed Turkey some time back.
14
Right or wrong, Turkey seems to insist on being its own country.
21
And good for them!
2
Completely predictable in some ways, since NATO and the Euros seem to have repeatably snubbed the Turkey.
11
This may be the occasion for NATO to become more assertive towards Turkey. Of course, we cannot maintain a Patriot missile system inside a country with a PRC radar and anti-missile system because our expensive missile systems would be at risk from their system and we are unlikely to be willing to integrate out software with PRC software for security reasons.
It may be that Turkey is no suitable as a member of NATO or, indeed, of the EU.
It may be that Turkey is no suitable as a member of NATO or, indeed, of the EU.
4
u.s. led nato bombed, invaded and destroyed Afghanistan.
u.s. led nato bombed, invaded, overthrew saddam Hussein, and destroyed Iraq.
u.s. led nato bombed, overthrew Kaddafi, and destroyed Libya.
what would you do if you were an arab or muslim?
did any of these countries pose a threat to Europe?
u.s. led nato bombed, invaded, overthrew saddam Hussein, and destroyed Iraq.
u.s. led nato bombed, overthrew Kaddafi, and destroyed Libya.
what would you do if you were an arab or muslim?
did any of these countries pose a threat to Europe?
10
Edrogan has the tiger by the tail. After years of deliberately explotiing fundamentalists to consolidate power, Edrogan can now no longer afford to do anything to maintain his autocracy.
7
Some of us were warning, including in letters and comments, nearly 15 years ago that Tayyip Erdogan's & AKP's vision of Islam and democracy were not compatible. To call Erdogan a wolf in sheep's clothing would be a disservice to wolves. Yet, the New York Times was one of many in the U.S. media extolling the virtues of AKP's governing of Turkey and holding it up as an example that others in the Muslim world could emulate. You are now belatedly finding out where Tayyip's road leads. His actions concerning Nato are the least of it, as he and his party have spent years imprisoning or intimidating the political opposition, eroding democracy and freedom - including the freedoms of press, assembly and speech, and slowly turning Turkey into a theocracy.
64
Heartily agree. The NYT was backing RTE for years. Short sighted and frustrating.
1
One could not have said better! Agreed with every word.
The NY Times and the rest of the bastion of the Western press (the Journal, FT, the Economist et el) preached Erdogan over secular forces of the country as Erdogan was promising under sun just to get him to his final destination point: a theocratic strongly Islamist nation that rules the world a la Ottomans once did.
The secular foundations and strong leadership of the Turkish Military has been weakened tremendously under faux-forged sham trials via duo of Erdogan-Fethullah Gulen, whom has been residing in the US since 1999. The Times and the rest of the press was keeping a close eye to these sham trials even noted economist Dani Rodrik of Harvard, whose father in law was one of 5-star Army Generals arrested, was not finding a voice where Rodrik dismantled sham plots of the prosecution.
The NY Times and the rest of the bastion of the Western press (the Journal, FT, the Economist et el) preached Erdogan over secular forces of the country as Erdogan was promising under sun just to get him to his final destination point: a theocratic strongly Islamist nation that rules the world a la Ottomans once did.
The secular foundations and strong leadership of the Turkish Military has been weakened tremendously under faux-forged sham trials via duo of Erdogan-Fethullah Gulen, whom has been residing in the US since 1999. The Times and the rest of the press was keeping a close eye to these sham trials even noted economist Dani Rodrik of Harvard, whose father in law was one of 5-star Army Generals arrested, was not finding a voice where Rodrik dismantled sham plots of the prosecution.
The president of Turkey is no different than an evangelical Republican, except he has full control of the Turkish parliament. It is sad to see the early progress of the Erdogan administration washed away as a theological agenda takes hold of his ego. The status of the secular state has been quietly decreasing and this is no progress. It is regression, replaced by new establishment that will make Turkey, "The sick man of Europe" once again. Where is the alternative leader to this?
7
The day Turkish presidents swear when they start their office, putting their hands on the Koran Turkey will start a revolution to stop him.
Quite so, only the "sick man of Europe" will soon be "just another sick man of the mideast."
A very timely article because it is becoming clearer that Turkey, which is rapidly becoming an Islamic autocracy that no longer shares core values with the West has no future in NATO. In a relatively short time, Erdogan has dismantles the secular democracy that Ataturk built after the end of the Ottoman Empire. Virtually all of the secular values of the Turkish Republic such as freedom of speech, Freedom of the Press and equality for women are being dismantled.
With the military, who historically secured the Republic, being neutered, there is no one to stop Erdogan from transforming Turkey into an Islamic Republic, a la Iran.
There will come a time when NATO will have to demand that Mr. Erdogan either prove he's in or out, and I fear the answer will be "out".
With the military, who historically secured the Republic, being neutered, there is no one to stop Erdogan from transforming Turkey into an Islamic Republic, a la Iran.
There will come a time when NATO will have to demand that Mr. Erdogan either prove he's in or out, and I fear the answer will be "out".
33
for 70 years following the break up of the ottoman empire, citizens of turkey were bombarded with a crude nationalist propaganda from their government seeking to create a 'national' identity. campaigns like "citizen speak turkish" were directed at non native turkish speaking citizens of greek, armenian and jewish backgrounds. greek speaking muslims in the black sea were bastinadoed in schools, while the existence of a people called 'kurds' was scoffed at.
while turkey is ostensibly sunni muslim, nearly 25% of the population belong to a heterodox sect called the alevi (related to the alawi in syria - a vague comparison would be between baptist and universalist churches). They have been terribly persecuted since the 16th century when they were caught between the sunni ottomans and shia persians.
there is a strong fundamentalist islamic movement in turkey. it has always existed. a group called IBDA B (the great islamic state) tried to bomb the greek orthodox patriarchate in the 1990s...the secular state forced them into the shadows, but there is no doubt that recruitment for IS is rampant. in fact, quite a large percentage of fighters for IS are turks, so...
the future looks fraught with danger for turkey. while the country's elites continue to make hand over fist, a very dangerous situation is developing.
while turkey is ostensibly sunni muslim, nearly 25% of the population belong to a heterodox sect called the alevi (related to the alawi in syria - a vague comparison would be between baptist and universalist churches). They have been terribly persecuted since the 16th century when they were caught between the sunni ottomans and shia persians.
there is a strong fundamentalist islamic movement in turkey. it has always existed. a group called IBDA B (the great islamic state) tried to bomb the greek orthodox patriarchate in the 1990s...the secular state forced them into the shadows, but there is no doubt that recruitment for IS is rampant. in fact, quite a large percentage of fighters for IS are turks, so...
the future looks fraught with danger for turkey. while the country's elites continue to make hand over fist, a very dangerous situation is developing.
5
In the aftermath of the collapse of the USSR, NATO led by the US could have redefined its mission or disbanded voluntarily in acknowledgement that its mission had been accomplished. But no, we had to do the dance of victory, the high fives, the outlandish claims that Reagan had won the Cold War, rub Russia's nose in its defeat. Now the times have changed and especially with the ill-considered admission of new members that it makes no sense for us to defend, like Hungary which is veering toward Russia, Bulgaria, Rumania, we are seeing the blow-back from Russia and the erosion of NATO which will be a defeat and humiliation for us.
15
Our involvement in Eastern European and Southwest Asian affairs has become a farce and the USA should step back and re-evaluate its security treaties.
One farce among many is that we are relying on Russia to support our sanctions against Iran while at the same time we are imposing sanctions on Russia because of Ukraine incursion. Complicating also is that we depend on Russia for our astronaut program. Where is the clear cut USA security issue in this tangled web?
Our most loyal allies in the fight against the Islamic State are the Kurds who don't have a homeland of their own. What is our obligation to them once this settles down? How do we then confront the powers in Turkey, Iraq, and Syria who don't want Kurdish autonomy and have aggressed against them in the past?
How would we fulfill our NATO obligations if Russia were to cause trouble in the Baltic countries but the aggression was not clear cut but under pretense of protecting the native Russians in those countries?
Is the NATO treaty clear cut now? Would Turkey and the other signatories come to USA's aid in a true defense emergency? Could the aid even be meaningful? The parameters of the emergencies should be clearly defined and the treaty obligations clarified.
One farce among many is that we are relying on Russia to support our sanctions against Iran while at the same time we are imposing sanctions on Russia because of Ukraine incursion. Complicating also is that we depend on Russia for our astronaut program. Where is the clear cut USA security issue in this tangled web?
Our most loyal allies in the fight against the Islamic State are the Kurds who don't have a homeland of their own. What is our obligation to them once this settles down? How do we then confront the powers in Turkey, Iraq, and Syria who don't want Kurdish autonomy and have aggressed against them in the past?
How would we fulfill our NATO obligations if Russia were to cause trouble in the Baltic countries but the aggression was not clear cut but under pretense of protecting the native Russians in those countries?
Is the NATO treaty clear cut now? Would Turkey and the other signatories come to USA's aid in a true defense emergency? Could the aid even be meaningful? The parameters of the emergencies should be clearly defined and the treaty obligations clarified.
29
"we are relying on Russia to support our sanctions against Iran while at the same time we are imposing sanctions on Russia"
Yes. When you put it that way, it looks pretty foolish, doesn't it?
Yes. When you put it that way, it looks pretty foolish, doesn't it?
5
If Turkey is humiliatingly kept away from the membership of the European Union why the West should feel rattled if Turkey adopts an ambivalence on defense cooperation with the latter in the Middle East, specially when the current situation in the region directly impacts Turkey's strategic and security interests ?
21
The USA is not a member of the European Union and Turkey has a NATO security agreement with the USA. The two organizations should not be conflated.
At issue are the mutual obligations of Turkey and the USA to each other under the NATO treaty. Obviously we are at a point where they are not clearly defined.
At issue are the mutual obligations of Turkey and the USA to each other under the NATO treaty. Obviously we are at a point where they are not clearly defined.
6
Turkey does not belong to the European Union and frankly does not belong to NATO either. The NATO membership is a legacy of the 1950s when the world was very different. Let Turkey loose, to go its way wherever it wishes, and no more military and technology transfers to Erdogan.
30
The letter from Republican members of the Congress to the president of Iran warning that any agreements reached with President Obama could be unilaterally nullified by the next president of the US. By extension, this nullification doctrine also applies to all US treaties. It is important for the general public of the US and the world-at-large to understand that all legislation continues in force until such time as it is no longer desired by the Congress . . . at which point the Congress can nullify it. The Republican letter simply made explicit the reality. Politics decides if and when nullification will occur. So-called "ObamaCare" continues because repeated efforts to repeal it by Republican members of the Congress lacks sufficient votes. So, too, does any US treaty depend on the lack of sufficient votes to nullify it if members of the Congress turn against it.
I'm no fan of Erdogan's and particularly abhor his obsession with the Kurds. Even so, it's hard to blame him for his reluctance to confront ISIS given the difficulties he's faced getting Turkey admitted to the E.U. (quid pro quo at work?). At the same time he's repeatedly implored NATO (or, in any case, the U.S.) to establish a no-fly zone in western Syria in order to halt Assad's atrocities against his own Sunni population. He's right to suggest that ISIS and Assad are two sides of the same coin: getting rid of one will only prove advantageous to the other. If we won't destroy Assad (which is understandable) we should at least box him in in the same way that we did Saddam Hussein following the first Gulf War. At which point Erdogan would be more receptive to the idea of shutting down the lifeline to ISIS and, conceivably, to actively assisting the Kurds and the secular Sunnis to wipe them out entirely.
21
Why do so many believe that Erdogan wants to be part of the EU? At one time maybe, but no longer. Many Turks believe that Erdogan made noises about joining the EU in order to consolidate his first winning coalition of voters. Erdogan is not interested in the rule of law or in creating a functional financial system. He interested in his own power and nothing more. Under his leadership, Turkey has become less and less able to meet EU standards. Turkey is ruled by a "Big Man" who is conflates his own power with what is good for Turkey. Turkey is in for some hard times.
1
After a decade of exploding debt growth, both external debt in foreign currencies to fund shopping malls and palaces and consumer debt to fund consumption, Turkey one of the riskiest emerging economies in the world.
The Turkish application to join the EU has languished, obstentisibly over concerns about corruption and human rights. But the idea of younger Turkish workers migrating throughout the EU in search of better opportunity is not a popular idea at the moment within the key member nations, especially given their porous border with Syria.
There are almost certainly difficult days ahead for Turkey under Erdogan. Given the chaos that already surrounds Turkey, his direction for the country could not have come at a worse time.
The Turkish application to join the EU has languished, obstentisibly over concerns about corruption and human rights. But the idea of younger Turkish workers migrating throughout the EU in search of better opportunity is not a popular idea at the moment within the key member nations, especially given their porous border with Syria.
There are almost certainly difficult days ahead for Turkey under Erdogan. Given the chaos that already surrounds Turkey, his direction for the country could not have come at a worse time.
47
Since Byzantine times, the position of Turkey has been defended by doing some of one thing, then some of the other, shifting in a dance to meet problems from all directions. It has never been consistently one thing. That seems to be inherent in its position as a crossroads between worlds.
Erdogan has been more democratic than the rest of the Muslim world, and more so than the military dictatorship he replaced. Even as he steps back and turns in his dance, he remains more democratic than the rest and better than the dictators he replaced -- remember the movies about the horrors of Turkey's dictatorship before he cleaned that up, and take a look at Egypt or Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan or most anywhere around there.
If he's not in the tent with us, he'll be just outside our tent abusing it with Russia and Iran and others.
As for his support of ISIS, that was done with the US and other US allies. Turkey didn't invent that mess, nor do it alone, nor even provide much more than land for others' men and money and weapons.
In LBJ's words, are we better off with them in the tent with us, or just outside it? They are not going away. They'll be right there either way.
Erdogan has been more democratic than the rest of the Muslim world, and more so than the military dictatorship he replaced. Even as he steps back and turns in his dance, he remains more democratic than the rest and better than the dictators he replaced -- remember the movies about the horrors of Turkey's dictatorship before he cleaned that up, and take a look at Egypt or Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan or most anywhere around there.
If he's not in the tent with us, he'll be just outside our tent abusing it with Russia and Iran and others.
As for his support of ISIS, that was done with the US and other US allies. Turkey didn't invent that mess, nor do it alone, nor even provide much more than land for others' men and money and weapons.
In LBJ's words, are we better off with them in the tent with us, or just outside it? They are not going away. They'll be right there either way.
1
Turkey, led by the duly elected Erdogan, seems to have lost its way. I was a Peace Corps volunteer there 50 years ago and have been watching and visiting over the years, most recently last spring.
Erdogan is a megalomaniac and paranoid to boot, harassing and even jailing opponents. It's hard to understand what he's up to with his policy vis a vis Syria with which Turkey has its longest land border. To its credit, Turkey has accepted almost endless numbers of refugees from Syria. But why it isn't trying to do what it can to tamp down the conflict along its border is odd. Rather, it seems content to let foreigners enter Turkey by flying into Istanbul and travel to southern Turkey and to join ISIS. Land borders are porous but airports are not. Turkey is perfectly able to identify travelers likely to be on their way to Syria and not let them enter Turkey. And rather than continue to harass its own Kurdish citizens, most of whom live in the East, it should be making every effort to bind them more closely to the rest of the country. Not cooperating with NATO is not the worst of Erdogan's inexplicable sins.
Erdogan is a megalomaniac and paranoid to boot, harassing and even jailing opponents. It's hard to understand what he's up to with his policy vis a vis Syria with which Turkey has its longest land border. To its credit, Turkey has accepted almost endless numbers of refugees from Syria. But why it isn't trying to do what it can to tamp down the conflict along its border is odd. Rather, it seems content to let foreigners enter Turkey by flying into Istanbul and travel to southern Turkey and to join ISIS. Land borders are porous but airports are not. Turkey is perfectly able to identify travelers likely to be on their way to Syria and not let them enter Turkey. And rather than continue to harass its own Kurdish citizens, most of whom live in the East, it should be making every effort to bind them more closely to the rest of the country. Not cooperating with NATO is not the worst of Erdogan's inexplicable sins.
89
So tired of hearing this theory that somehow we can easily identify people who might be "radicalized" or intend to fight in foreign conflicts, and thus the US and/or Turkey must scrutinize travelers originating in or departing to Istanbul as if it's the only viable transit point to whatever international crisis happens to be the flavor of the week. The CBP Immigration Advisory Program interviews of US citizens with "broken travel" originating in Turkey are humiliating and downright insulting to our human rights and dignity. Do they really think that a malafide individual will just confess everything with a little prodding? As it stands now, the easiest way for Istanbul expats to get home is via direct flights from Ataturk simply because there is still no US CBP presence there, and I'm very thankful to the Turkish authorities for keeping this needless security theater out of our lives. By all means, if we have credible, verified, on-the-ground intelligence indicating that someone is a jihadist, put SSSS on their boarding pass. But the current dragnet targeting many Istanbul expats on the basis of travel records alone is a completely overboard reaction to what is still a relatively minuscule - indeed, theoretical - threat to the United States, and I hope Turkey cooperates with it as little as possible.
1
I was thinking more of Turkey's self-interest than ours. Security video from Ataturk airport was released, after the Charlie Hebdo assassinations in Paris, of the wife of one of the attackers entering Turkey weeks before and having transited to Syria. There were a couple of "school girls" from the UK (ages not given, but were they 18?) having flown to Turkey and then traveled onward to Syria. The Turks say "there's nothing we can do" but that sounds more like an excuse than a reason.
Maybe this is part of Erdogan's opposition to Assad. (although years ago they were buddies and Assad visited Erdogan at his summer home. Stephen Kinzer said this. He should know.)
It's odd to me that Erdogan is playing remote "footsie" with ISIS. What's that about?
Maybe this is part of Erdogan's opposition to Assad. (although years ago they were buddies and Assad visited Erdogan at his summer home. Stephen Kinzer said this. He should know.)
It's odd to me that Erdogan is playing remote "footsie" with ISIS. What's that about?
1
Addendum - per BBC 3 girls who traveled to Turkey and onward to Syria were 15, 15, and 16.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/10/missing-girls-stole-famil...
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/10/missing-girls-stole-famil...
2
Turkey is a sovereign nation with a duly elected Islamist megalomaniac, who Obama once believed was a buddy he could do business with. So what?
Turkey pursues its interests. So what.
But why aren't we pursuing our national interests given the stupid games Turkey is playing in Erdogan's delusions of regional Islamist hegemony? Instead, of our pursuing our national interests given the conflict, we have a combination of happy talk and ostrich.
The U.S. holds more cards than any other nation and has power to pick winners and losers if it would only have a strategy but it refuses to play the game.
Turkey pursues its interests. So what.
But why aren't we pursuing our national interests given the stupid games Turkey is playing in Erdogan's delusions of regional Islamist hegemony? Instead, of our pursuing our national interests given the conflict, we have a combination of happy talk and ostrich.
The U.S. holds more cards than any other nation and has power to pick winners and losers if it would only have a strategy but it refuses to play the game.
33
What are our national interests with regard to Turkey? Do we want Turkey to balance Iran? Are we still scared of Russian access to the Mediterranean? And assuming we have clear national interests with regard to Turkey, what power do we actually have these days to influence other countries? I think our national interests are in fact now less geopolitical and more global (building international institutions, sustaining economic growth, combatting spread of disease, fighting religious extremism, dealing with climate change, et al.). In that framework, there are no winners and losers. There is just the world and our ability to live well in it.
6
The last time we "played a game" over there, the "aluminum rods cards" we played sent that part of the world into the tailspin we are dealing with now, and will be be for the foreseeable future. Cards? This is not a game.
Sometimes it takes a bad guy to hold sway over the much worse guys. Too bad GW and Cheney did not realize this, even though their Generals told them.
What are our Generals saying now?
Erdogan's paranoia is well founded, I am sure he has enemies everywhere. our own President is worried about being assassinated all the time. Do we think he is paranoid?
Sometimes it takes a bad guy to hold sway over the much worse guys. Too bad GW and Cheney did not realize this, even though their Generals told them.
What are our Generals saying now?
Erdogan's paranoia is well founded, I am sure he has enemies everywhere. our own President is worried about being assassinated all the time. Do we think he is paranoid?
1