BY DAILY SABAH
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan criticized NATO allies for overlooking Turkey’s contributions to the military bloc when there are no threats to their national security, as Ankara opposes Sweden and Finland’s membership for their support of terrorist groups that threaten Turkey’s national security.
In an exclusive article written for the British weekly The Economist on Monday, Erdoğan said his country’s increased defensive capacity has contributed to the alliance’s resilience and strength.
“Whereas our partners have always appreciated Turkish contributions to NATO’s collective security mission, they quickly forgot about them when there were no threats to their national security. Our partners who only remember Turkey’s importance in turbulent times, such as the crisis in the Balkans, mistakenly thought that long-term stability could be achieved without Turkey,” he said.
“Thus, after the elimination of the immediate threat, they disregarded geopolitical realities and the potential threats that might emerge in the region. Needless to say, such pipe dreams turned out to be short-lived as a result of international crises,” he explained.
Noting that threats to international peace and security have recently changed, which led many to believe that NATO was an “obsolete” organization, that ceased to serve its purpose, Erdoğan said even the French president said in 2019 that the bloc was experiencing “brain death.” He continued by saying that the same individuals questioned Turkey’s role in NATO, which he said cost the alliance many years.
The president continued by saying that Turkey did not think the shortsighted and occasionally reckless attitudes of some member states reflect the position of NATO as a bloc, adding that Ankara underlined the importance of the alliance and called on member states to take necessary steps.
“That call was in line with our nation’s response to the international system’s deepening instability, too.”
Erdoğan drew attention to Turkey and argued that NATO – like all other international organizations – had to implement certain reforms to cope with emerging security threats.
“Specifically on terrorism, the lack of collective action, in spite of direct attacks against many member states, undermined security cooperation and fueled deep distrust among the citizens of NATO countries about the organization,” he said.
“Turkey has highlighted that trend at all NATO summits and maintained that international cooperation was vital for transforming the fight against terrorism. We wanted NATO to cooperate better on intelligence and military issues when dealing with terrorist organizations, not only to prevent terrorist attacks but also to curb terrorist financing and recruitment within NATO borders. We remain committed to that position,” he outlined.
‘Turkey’s expectations, calls were accurate’
Erdoğan noted that Turkey made legitimate and necessary demands for NATO, as multiple civil wars broke out in Turkey’s neighborhood, to ensure the security of its borders, airspace and human security.
“Largely abandoned, our country dealt with all those crises by itself and paid a high price during that effort. Ironically, any steps taken under the NATO umbrella would have prepared the alliance for future conflicts and crises at its borders,” he noted.
“The new state of affairs, which emerged out of the war in Ukraine, proves that Turkey’s expectations and calls were accurate. Certain member states, which suddenly appreciated Turkey’s geopolitical positioning as the conflict caused widespread disruption, saw that our nation had been right to take certain steps in the past. Turkey was right to ask NATO members to prepare for coming geopolitical challenges and, in spite of those who argued that NATO was irrelevant, Turkey was absolutely right to state that the organization would be increasingly important,” he explained.
He said it was unfortunate that some NATO members fail to acknowledge certain threats to Turkey while all NATO allies accept the country’s critical importance to the alliance.
“Turkey maintains that the admission of Sweden and Finland entails risks for its own security and the organization’s future. We have every right to expect those countries, which will expect NATO’s second-largest army to come to their defense under Article 5, to prevent the recruitment, fundraising and propaganda activities of the PKK, which the European Union and America consider a terrorist entity,” he highlighted.
Stressing the demand of his country that the candidate countries restrain the activities of all terrorist organizations and extradite their members, Erdoğan said: “We provided clear evidence to the authorities in these countries and waited for action from them. Also, Turkey wants these countries to support the counterterrorism operations of NATO members. Terrorism is a threat to all members and the candidate countries should recognize this reality before joining. Unless they take necessary steps, Turkey will not change its position on this issue.”
Damaging NATO’s own identity
Erdoğan also underlined that all forms of arms embargoes are incompatible with the spirit of military partnership under NATO.
“Such restrictions not only undermine our national security but also damage NATO’s own identity. Sweden’s and Finland’s uncompromising insistence on joining the alliance has added an unnecessary item to NATO’s agenda,” he said.
“Turkey’s objection to the admission of Sweden and Finland, which remained neutral up until the most recent developments, represents a decisive step taken on behalf of all nations that have been targeted by terrorist organizations to date. At the end of the day, terrorism has no religion, nation or color. That each member state decisively stands up to any organization that aims to harm the civilian population is one of NATO’s core aims. No country enjoys any privilege in that regard,” he highlighted.
Stand on national security concerns, considerations of other countries
Erdoğan said where Stockholm and Helsinki stand on the national security concerns and considerations of other countries with which they would like to be allies will determine to what extent Ankara would like to be allies with those states.
“The ignorance and obtrusiveness of those who dare to question the relationship between Turkey, which has adopted a positive and constructive approach regarding the alliance’s expansion in the past, and NATO does not change our stance. Our country, which is open to all forms of diplomacy and dialogue, strongly recommends that such focus be directed instead to persuading the candidates to change their positions,” he urged.
“There is no authority in Ankara that can be told what to do by any country that is unwilling to fight terrorism. We believe that the reputation and the credibility of the alliance will be at risk if NATO members follow double standards in regard to the fight against terrorism,” he noted.
Turkey said it would not view the applications of Finland and Sweden positively, mainly citing their history of support for terrorist organizations, including the PKK and its Syrian wing, the YPG. In response to a Turkish operation in 2019 against the PKK’s Syrian wing, the YPG, Sweden and Finland, among others, imposed restrictions on arms exports to Turkey. Over the last five years, both Sweden and Finland have failed to agree to Ankara’s requests for the extradition of dozens of terrorists, including members of the PKK and the Gülenist Terrorist Group (FETÖ), the group behind the 2016 defeated coup in Turkey.
Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24 has swung political and public opinion in Finland and neighboring Sweden in favor of NATO membership as a deterrent against Russian aggression.
Sweden and Finland formally submitted applications for NATO membership to Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, who said the alliance would assess the membership bid as quickly as possible but stressed that the security interests of all allies “have to be taken into account,” referring to Turkey’s objections.
All 30 members of the alliance must unanimously agree before any new members can join.