The NATO summit in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius has ended. Do Turkey’s intra-NATO maneuvers signal a change or a fine-tuning of Ankara’s post-election foreign policy course? According to Dr. Kaan Kutlu Ataç, there is no shift in axis or geopolitical reason for it. Stating that Turkey has two main agendas focused on economy and defense, Ataç emphasizes that the maneuvers, negotiations and steps in foreign policy should be viewed from this perspective.
The NATO summit in Vilnius is the second meeting held in the shadow of the Russia-Ukraine war. Having been on its agenda since the war, NATO’s enlargement policy is noteworthy as a bargaining chip that Ankara uses against its Western allies.
At the Spain Summit, Ankara put forward certain demands in exchange for Finland and Sweden’s membership, and although it gave its approval to Finland, it kept the Sweden card until this summit. In Vilnius, the new foreign affairs team re-set the bargaining table by bringing up the back-burner issue of “opening Turkey’s path to the European Union (EU)”.
While lifting sanctions on the defense industry, paving the way for the sale of F-16s, and Sweden’s consideration of Ankara’s sensitivities in the fight against terrorism were the most prominent demands, according to Dr. Kaan Kutlu Ataç, “the economic pendulum is the most important parameter for Ankara in foreign policy.”
“Ankara is maximalist in negotiations”
Commenting on the NATO summit to Harici, Dr. Kaan Kutlu Ataç, a lecturer at Mersin University, shares the view that the sometimes hardening or softening relations between Turkey and the West cannot be discussed in the brackets of “axis shift”. According to Ataç, “the typical approach of Turkish foreign policy is maximalist.”
Underlining that “middle powers act with a maximalist approach in their foreign policies and aim for the highest benefit,” Ataç says, “Lifting sanctions is a priority for Turkey.”
Ataç assesses that the rapprochement process with Russia after the 2016 coup attempt was also driven by pragmatic priorities and reminds that both countries have deep mutual mistrust.
Ataç says that although Turkey and Russia have conflicting interests in the Caucasus, Africa and Libya, these differences do not prevent them from developing deep relations in trade, tourism and energy.
“There are security-related tensions and mutual concerns,” Ataç says, adding that despite these, Ankara and Moscow will continue to develop relations based on pragmatic mutual benefit.
Why is there no axis shift?
How will the prioritization of NATO and the EU agenda and Ankara’s desire to open a new page with Western allies affect relations with Moscow? According to Russian statements, there will be no significant change. Indeed, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, “Turkey has obligations to NATO regarding Sweden’s NATO membership,” adding that Moscow is willing to develop relations with Ankara despite differences of opinion.
“Historically, relations with Russia have always been based on tensions,” said Dr. Kaan Kutlu Ataç, adding that “Turkey is developing the relations with Moscow that it needs. There are conflicts of interest in Turkey’s relations with Moscow.”
He summarizes the relations between Ankara, Brussels and Moscow as “Turkey has pragmatic relations with Russia, and there is no strategic rupture with NATO.”
Ataç justifies why he thinks there is no axis shift as follows: “There does not seem to be an axis shift in a technical sense. For there to be an axis shift, the importance of the Anatolian peninsula must strategically increase or decrease. On the axis stretching from North Africa to the Baltic, Anatolia is right in the middle. In NATO’s security policies, Anatolia should be one of the thickest links in the chain.”
“The US is taking Greece to another level”
According to Prof. Kaan Kutlu Ataç, Turkey’s desire for the lifting of Western overt and covert sanctions has two goals. The first is to meet the need for modernization in the defense industry. The second is to ensure the flow of Western resources into the blocked financial system.
On the other hand, “there is a sharp line in Turkey-US relations,” says Ataç, adding that the US has “shifted security from Ankara to Athens.
Emphasizing that modernization is a priority in Turkey’s defense, Ataç says Washington has “elevated the Greek army to another level.”
“The West will not give too much”
“Turkey is looking to get what it can from the West in terms of economy and defense industry,” says Ataç, noting that there is a bottleneck on financial and monetary issues.
To what extent can Ankara, which focuses on creating a positive agenda with NATO, the US, the EU and the West in general, achieve the desired results?
At this point, Ataç says, “It seems that they will not give too much. Turkey is looking to Arab capital for this. However, Arab capital also has close financial ties with the West,” he notes.
“The US wants to further wear Russia down”
Ukraine’s NATO membership agenda has been postponed indefinitely, but signs of escalating war have raised tensions. Moscow responded harshly to the G7 countries’ pledge of security guarantees for Ukraine and the hot topic of supplying Kiev with fighter jets. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called Western plans to supply Kiev with US-designed fighter jets “an extremely dangerous development” and said Moscow sees the F-16 supply as a nuclear threat.
“For the United States, Russia is an adversary that can be overcome,” Ataç said, adding that Washington “wants to further wear Russia down.”
Ataç continued:
“Creating an adversary you can overcome… This is how Russia is defined in the strategy. And crisis management is important for managing tensions, so you need to keep that tension with Russia. The West has not technically integrated Moscow into Western institutions, neither during the Cold War nor after the Cold War.”
“The US is playing this game very hard,” Ataç says, emphasizing that the US “needs the Russian threat” to maintain its domination over Europe.
