In the aftermath of World War II, with the Soviet Union replacing Germany as the major threat to stability in Europe, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was established to provide collective security for members against Soviet expansionism. In 1949, the U.S., Canada and 10 European nations became its founding members. Today, NATO boasts 30 members committed to the “Three Musketeer” pledge of one for all and all for one. In accordance with Article 5 of the NATO treaty, members agreed to a collective defense warning potential aggressors an attack against one is an attack against all.
NATO’s membership today includes two in North America, 27 in Europe and one in Eurasia. Five members share a total of 754 border miles abutting Russia. Moscow partially justified its invasion of Ukraine over concerns it too would join NATO.
But Russian President Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked military action against Ukraine only encouraged two other regional neighbors – Finland, sharing an 830 mile continuous border with Russia, and Sweden – to apply for NATO membership. Should Finland join, the total border mileage abutting Russia will more than double to 1,584 miles.
States seeking NATO membership must meet certain political, economic and military standards. Minimally, these include: 1) upholding democracy, to include tolerating diversity; 2) progressing toward a market economy; 3) maintaining a military firmly under civilian control; 4) acting as a good regional neighbor that respects sovereignty outside its own borders and 5) working to achieve compatibility with NATO forces.
Clearly, both Finland and Sweden meet these standards. Applicant states must receive unanimous approval to join. Thus, motivated by the concept that the more members there are, the merrier NATO is, all 30 states should support the addition. To date, 28 members have. Of the remaining two votes to be cast, by Hungary and Turkey, we can count on the former voting “yea” with the latter voting “nay.”
Undoubtedly, Turkey has delayed casting its vote in hopes one of the other 29 members would object first, letting Ankara “off the hook.” Were a prior “nay” vote cast, it would spare Turkey making a vote contrary to NATO’s interests.
Turkey joined NATO three years after the alliance was founded. However, as explained below, the Turkey of 1952 is not the Turkey of 2023.
Many of NATO’s members joined years after Turkey did, prompted by the fall of the Soviet Union. Its collapse freed up several East European states within the Soviet Bloc to go their separate ways, pursuing freedom and capitalism. As such, they gradually began meeting the NATO standards above and were motivated to join over fears that, while the Soviet Union may be dead, Russia was not. And, understanding Russia’s aggressive psyche, they knew NATO was their safety shield.
But while these European nations turned towards the light of liberty, Turkey, benefiting from promoting individual freedoms and capitalism during the second half of the 20th century, has taken a turn toward the dark side during the past two decades. This redirection has been led by its current president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Interestingly, Erdogan – who seeks Turkey’s return to the glory days of the Ottoman Empire – has drawn close to another autocratic leader, Putin, who seeks Russia’s return to the glory days of the Soviet empire.
Undoubtedly, this relationship puts Erdogan in a precarious position, forcing him either to act in NATO’s best interests, by voting yea for Finland and Sweden’s membership, or in Russia’s best interests, by voting nay. The last thing Putin wants to see is a NATO expansion, and only Erdogan holds the trump card for preventing this.
In a ploy to suggest a nay vote by Erdogan is not linked to the blossoming Turkish/Russian relationship, Ankara already sent Sweden a warning not to expect support for its NATO bid for failing to crack down on exiled Kurdish militants who publicly burned a Quran in Stockholm. If Erdogan anticipated this would stop Finland’s bid as well, Finland is hinting otherwise as it may continue without Sweden. This would place Erdogan in the uncomfortable position of coming up with a new excuse to stop Finland’s bid.
The Putin/Erdogan “bromance” has evolved over the past few years. In 2017, Turkey announced, over NATO objections, it was buying Russia’s S-400 missile defense system – a system designed to shoot down US F-35 combat aircraft. Ironically, Turkey had placed a massive order for F-35s. But since Erdogan’s decision to purchase the S-400 was contrary to a collective NATO pledge to move away from Russian systems, the U.S. kicked Turkey out of the F-35 program. Russia’s gain of $2.5 billion for selling the S-400 system and a U.S. loss of half a billion dollars for terminating the F-35 program was not quite in keeping with the Three Musketeer pledge.
More recently, following Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, Ankara refused to join in on Western sanctions against Moscow, welcoming Russian oligarchs into Turkey.
Under Erdogan’s leadership, Turkey has been edging back to its Ottoman Empire days in ways, demonstrating a divide developing between Ankara and NATO on social issues such as human rights. For example, he has been undermining the rights of women, reducing to 12 the legal age of consent to marry.
There have been other incidents evidencing a widening divide between Turkey and its NATO partners. These include Turkey’s:
- Initial refusal in 2016 to allow the U.S. access to its own base in Incirlik as operations into Iraq and Afghanistan were being planned.
- Violence in 2017 by Erdogan’s security detail in attacking and beating peaceful U.S. and Kurdish American demonstrators in Washington, D.C., including women and children, during a state visit.
- Aid to Libyan rival military groups in 2019.
- Recent airstrikes against Kurdish militias in northern Syria and threats to invade that country.
Toss in the consideration that Turkey currently conducts robust trading with both Russia and China and the question arises: Where exactly do Ankara’s loyalties lie?
The answer to that question will be revealed in the weeks ahead as Turkey makes its decision on Finland’s bid to join NATO.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.
