WASHINGTON – When Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan threatened to block Finland and Sweden’s NATO membership this month, Western officials were irritated but not shocked.
Within a consensus union, Turkey’s strong man began to be seen as something of an artist. In 2009, he blocked the appointment of a new NATO chief from Denmark, complaining that the country was too tolerant of Prophet Muhammad’s cartoons and too sympathetic to Turkey’s Kurdish terrorists. It took hours of persuasion from Western leaders and a personal promise from President Barack Obama that NATO would appoint a Turk to a leadership position to satisfy Mr Erdogan.
Following the severance of relations between Turkey and Israel the following year, Mr Erdogan prevented the alliance from working with the Jewish state for six years. A few years later, Mr Erdogan postponed for months NATO’s plan to fortify Eastern European nations against Russia, citing Kurdish extremists again and urging the alliance to declare those operating in Syria terrorists. In 2020, Mr Erdogan sent a fighter jet to support gas-backed aircraft near Greek waters, prompting France to send ships in support of Greece, also a NATO member.
Now the Turkish leader is returning to the role of obstructionist and is again referring to the Kurds, accusing Sweden and Finland of sympathizing with Kurdish extremists, whom he has made his main enemy.
“These countries have almost become guest houses for terrorist organizations,” he said this month. “It’s impossible to be of any use.”
Mr Erdogan’s position is a reminder of NATO’s long-running problem, which currently has 30 members. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine may give the alliance a new sense of mission, but NATO still has to fight an authoritarian leader willing to use its leverage to gain political points at home by blocking consensus – at least for a while.
This is a situation that plays in favor of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has become more friendly with Mr Erdogan in recent years. For the Russian leader, rejecting the accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO would be a significant victory.
The difficulty would have been easier had it not been for Turkey’s importance to the union. The country joined NATO in 1952 after joining the West against the Soviet Union; Turkey gives the alliance a decisive strategic position at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, over the Middle East and the Black Sea. It hosts a large US air base where US nuclear weapons are stored, and Mr Erdogan is blocking Russian warships bound for Ukraine.
But with Mr Erdogan, Turkey is increasingly becoming an issue that needs to be managed. As prime minister and then president, he diverted his country from Europe while pursuing an authoritarian and populist stamp on Islamist politics, especially after the failed 2016 coup attempt.
He bought from Russia an advanced missile system, which NATO officials call a threat to their integrated defense systems, and in 2019 launched a military invasion to fight the Kurds in northern Syria, who helped fight Islamic State with the support of USA.
“In my four years, there were often 27 against one,” said Ivo H. Daalder, the US ambassador to NATO during the Obama administration, when the alliance had 28 members.
Mr Erdogan’s objections to the membership of Sweden and Finland have even raised questions about whether NATO could be better off without Turkey.
An essay of opinion this month, co-authored by Joseph I. Lieberman, a former independent US senator from Connecticut, said Erdogan’s Turkey would violate the alliance’s standards for democratic governance in the future new member states. An essay published by The Wall Street Journal warns that Ankara’s policies, including coziness with Mr Putin, have undermined NATO’s interests and that the alliance must explore ways to expel Turkey.
“Turkey is a member of NATO, but under Erdogan it no longer joins the values that underlie this great alliance,” wrote Lieberman and Mark D. Wallace, chief executive of the Turkish Democracy Project. , a group critical of Mr Erdogan.
Some members of Congress have said that. “Turkey under Erdogan should not and cannot be seen as an ally,” said Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, a senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, following Turkey’s 2019 invasion of Syria.
But NATO is a military alliance, and Turkey, with the organization’s second-largest army, an advanced defense industry and its crucial geographical location, plays a vital role.
Western officials say Turkey would cause more problems as a resentful NATO outsider – and one who could link up more closely with Russia.
“Turkey has undermined its own image,” said Alper Koskun, a former Turkish diplomat who is now a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. But, he added, “she is still a critical member of the alliance.”
Again, the question is what will reassure Mr Erdogan and secure his support for the accession of Sweden and Finland.
President Biden emphasized US support for the move when he hosted the two nations’ leaders in the White House this month, and praised the larger NATO as a test against Russian force. “Biden has taken a very exposed, highly visible position by inviting them to Washington,” said James F. Jeffrey, the US ambassador to Turkey during the Obama administration.
Most analysts believe Mr Erdogan will not ultimately block the accession of Sweden and Finland, but wants to highlight Turkey’s own security concerns and make domestic gains ahead of next year’s elections.
Mr Erdogan is mainly concerned about Sweden’s long-standing support for the Kurdish Workers’ Party or PKK, which is seeking an independent Kurdish state in a territory partly within Turkey’s borders.
The PKK, which attacks non-military targets and kills civilians in Turkey, is banned in the country and has been identified by both the United States and the European Union as a terrorist organization, although some governments, including Sweden, view it more sympathetically as a Kurdish nationalist movement.
The United States has also backed its allied fighters in Syria, the YPG or the People’s Defense Forces, which helped in the fight against Islamic State and which Mr Erdogan attacked during his 2019 invasion.
The Turkish president wants the YPG to be identified as a terrorist group as well.
Mr Erdogan accuses both Finland and Sweden of hiding followers of Fethullah Gulen, a Turkish cleric living in exile in the United States, whom he blames for the 2016 coup. Turkey wants the extradition of about 35 people it says are linked with the Kurdish separatists or Mr Gulen.
Mr Erdogan also objected to the Swedish and Finnish arms embargo imposed on his country following the 2019 invasion of Syria. Sweden is already discussing lifting the embargo in the light of current events in Ukraine.
Some analysts say Mr Erdogan’s government views the PKK largely in the way Washington saw al Qaeda 20 years ago, and that the West cannot rule out fears if it hopes to do business with Turkey.
Biden officials are downplaying opposition and expect Erdogan to reach a compromise with Finland and Sweden. Turkish officials met with Finnish and Swedish counterparts in Ankara for several hours last week.
Julian Smith, the US ambassador to NATO, said in an interview that “this seems to be a problem they have with Sweden and Finland, so we will leave it in their hands.” She added that the United States would provide assistance if needed.
Appearing before the Finnish Foreign Minister in Washington on Friday, Secretary of State Anthony J. Blinken said he was “confident that we will work through this process quickly and that things will move forward with both sides.”
Emre Pecker, London-based director for Europe at Eurasia Group, a private consulting firm, said he did not believe Mr Erdogan was seeking concessions from Washington. He expressed confidence that Turkey could reach an agreement with Sweden and Finland through NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.
Mr Erdogan’s main priorities are to hear about his country’s security concerns about Kurdish separatists and lift the arms embargo, Mr Packer said.
Some American analysts are skeptical. Eric S. Edelman, a former US ambassador to Turkey and Finland, warned that Mr Erdogan could seek to win Mr Putin’s favor – or at least alleviate anger in Moscow over the sale of deadly drones to Ukrainian troops. private Turkish company.
“He has a very complicated relationship with Putin that he has to maintain,” Mr Edelman said. “It’s a good way to throw a little bone at Putin – ‘I’m still useful to you.’
Others believe the Turkish leader wants retribution from Washington. Mr Erdogan is angry that the United States has denied Turkey access to the F-35 stealth fighter after its purchase of the Russian S-400 missile system in 2017. Turkey is now lobbying instead for the purchase of advanced F-16 fighters, but has met with strong opposition in Congress from Mr Menendez.
Mr Erdogan may also be seeking presidential attention. He had friendly relations with President Donald J. Trump, but Mr. Biden kept his distance.
“This is a man who should be at the center of the stage,” said Mr Daalder, a former US ambassador to NATO. “It’s a way of saying, ‘Hey, I’m still here.’ You have to pay attention to my problems. “
Mr Pecker said an agreement could be negotiated between Turkey and the Nordic countries ahead of next month’s NATO summit in Madrid, which would allow the signing of accession protocols there.
More likely some …
Add Comment