By Jonathan Feldstein
I’m not sure what the rationale was to bring an Islamist nation with expansionist goals and a vision of creating a revised Ottoman caliphate into NATO to begin with, but if it ever made sense, it no longer does. It’s time to expel Turkey from NATO.
It’s generous to look at Turkey as “European,” and they certainly have no connection to the North Atlantic, but Turkey certainly does threaten Europe. Turkey creates tension because of it is the only NATO member with such broad expansionist goals: in Syria, in northern Africa, as well as its occupation of Cyprus (which is part of Europe). Turkey allowed a flood of millions of illegal migrants from Syria and elsewhere to transverse its borders, and enter actual Europe.
As a member of NATO, Turkey puts all NATO countries into a potential conflict due to its aggression, with each having the obligation to defend fellow NATO members. Aspiring to erase borders and threaten and control other countries, Turkey’s may suck all of Europe into a broader regional war.
Recently, the possibility of a regional war has never been more real. Turkish fingerprints are all over the fall of the Assad regime in Syria by arming and supporting the jihadi terrorists that now control much of Syria.
What would happen if Russia or Iran would seek to regain their lost influence by taking military action against Turkey? Would NATO members really need to defend that?
What if Turkey’s growing occupation of Syria puts its targeting the US backed Kurdish community in jeopardy, and in the crosshairs of the US? Could it trigger a war by Turkey attacking US allies, in which the US is obligated under NATO to defend Turkey?
What if the newfound Turkish influence in and occupation of Syria brings it to direct conflict with Israel as Turkish President Erdogan had threatened multiple times, and is now physically closer and able to implement through its neo-Ottoman land bridge? Will NATO be forced to confront Israel if Israel were to attack Turkey to defend itself?
Maybe this is all far-fetched, but who would have imagined several weeks ago that we’d wake up one morning and there would be no more Assad regime after half a century? Who imagined that Israel would be able to eliminate the majority of the Syrian military virtually overnight, land more than 100 troops deep into Syria to destroy an Iranian missile plant, or that one day thousands of Hezbollah terrorists would be disarmed (literally) by exploding beepers.
Adding fuel to the threats that he’s made against Israel for years, Turkish President Erdogan announced recently that Turkey’s long-range missile capabilities are being strengthened, increasing the number of missiles with an 800 km range along with missiles with a range of 2,000 km.
While Erdogan has stoked his nation’s anti-Israeli sentiment for years, there’s no shortage of popular support for the Islamist’s position. Recently, tens of thousands of people demonstrated against Israel in Istanbul, expressing solidarity with Gazans and Hamas.
Growing signs that Israel must prepare for a potential war were addressed in the recent report of Israel’s Nagel Committee, to assess the growing risk of a direct armed conflict with Turkey.
The report highlights “Turkey’s ambitions to reclaim Ottoman-era influence, posing a threat that could surpass even the Iranian challenge,” noting that “The Syrian threat could transform into something more perilous, with Turkish-backed forces acting as proxies to destabilize the region.”
The committee proposed several areas to prepare for a worst-case scenario with Turkey including: acquiring more F-15s, refueling aircraft, drones, and satellites to enhance long-range strike capabilities; strengthening Israel’s diverse Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and Arrow defense systems, along with the new Iron Beam; enhancing a fortified security barrier along the Jordan Valley across which Turkish backed terrorists could penetrate Israel.
For more than a decade, Israel’s relations with Turkey has spiraled down, with occasional hopeful improvements. Despite multiple wars and operations, the trumped-up arrest of Israeli tourists, and more, the two have maintained diplomatic relations, most of the time.
Even following the 2010 Turkish-led flotilla attempt to breach Israel’s maritime blockade on Gaza, ending up with the death of 10 Turkish citizens, Erdogan accused Israel of war crimes, claimed Israel is an apartheid state, and even threatened to take over the Temple Mount, relations were maintained. In 2018, both countries recalled their ambassadors. Most recently to restore relations, Israeli President Herzog paid a 2022 state visit to Turkey.
Erdogan has responded to Israel’s war against Hamas by severing all ties with Israel, imposing a trade blockade on Israel last April. Doubling down, Turkey joined South African’s accusation of Israel for allegations of genocide at the International Court of Justice.
Tourism, once a major facet of the bilateral relationship between Turkey and Israel, has also all but disappeared. Once a top destination for Israelis, it is no longer. There are currently no direct flights between the countries, a route once offering the most frequent departures from Israel.
Where there had once been so many flights, so much tourism, and each were major trade partners, and that’s all but evaporated, one wonders how much lower things can go. In that context, what’s to prevent Turkey from acting on its aggressive threats?
Turkey is looking to cement further its influence in Syria, which shares a border with Israel. For years, despite being officially at war, the border was one of Israel’s quietest. Now, as Turkey inches closer to Israel geographically, this quiet could be broken.
A military confrontation between Turkey and Israel would be unprecedented, whether intentional or not. Israel, which is still in the midst of a war on multiple fronts and with an Iranian threat still looming, still dealing with the trauma of the Hamas massacre and ensuing war, will not tolerate additional threats. Were Erdogan to take aggressive military action, Israel would be hard pressed not to respond forcefully. A war with Turkey would be shocking and unprecedented, but not impossible. And then as a NATO member, what would NATO’s responsibility be in defending Turkey?
For all these and other reasons, whether its expelling Turkey from NATO, or scrapping NATO and creating NATO 2.0 excluding Turkey, the status quo cannot remain.
The remaining wildcard is whether President Trump recognizes Turkey’s growing dangerous influence, and can and will act on it. Hopefully the answer is yes.
@Sebastien
It would have been useful if JPOST had linked the actual study they cited, but the JPOST article cites as their source of this ‘survey’ as being the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan, ie this comes from the University of Jordan which is a Hashemite controlled institution. So the same ‘king’ who sells blood libels against Israel on a daily basis, also holds influence over the institution which produced this study. So, just for clarity, this study, even as it is reported to be “the most comprehensive to measure Jordanian citizens’ attitudes” should still be held as suspect of bearing the ‘king’s thumb on the scales, so to speak.
In any event, the animus within Jordan for Israel and Jews in general is well known, and has in fact been shaped and weaponized by the same Islamist influences which hone the hatred of Israel in the PA and Gaza. As I noted below,
But the radicalization will stop with Mudar’s rise to power, just as it has stopped in the UAE and in SA. This isn’t to say that these nations don’t, or that Jordan won’t, have radical elements still existing in the population, but over time it has become far less significant due to their efforts which began with the elimination of the radical Islamists which led their institutions, their mosques, and many political movements….notably, among these the University of Jordan would no doubt be included, just FYI.
@Raphael
Yes, both World Wars. Germany had a mutual defence treaty with Japan which attacked the U.S. and then declared war on December 7, 1941 after which Germany reluctantly declared war on the U.S. forcing it into an unwinnable 2 front and later multif-front war. But, Israel will win. Israel is winning. Just as in all the other multi-front wars it has won against the odds. I used to be an agnostic. There’s such a thing as too many coincidences.
“Yohay Sponder-The Jewish Heritage” I love this guy.
https://youtu.be/55fg3Fo5-DM?si=zUptaRvRS_BH_RDS
@Peloni
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-700537
@Sebastien
Far less so than in Mubarak’s Egypt or Assad’s Syria, for a quintessential aspect which will follow Mudar’s rise to power, is that the Muslim Brotherhood and all of their political Islamist allies will be banned from Jordan, with the unkind hand of Mudar’s Jordanian justice waiting for them should they venture to return. You see, as is true with Saudi Arabia, and UAE, Mudar’s rule will require the elimination of these groups from Jordan, and their displacement from Jordan stands as a key element of the JO. Indeed, to the point made by Barry Shaw in his recent peace proposal, stability within these moderate Sunni nations requires the absence of these Islamist radicals, even as these same radical elements now flourish within the borders of Israel’s cold peace partners, Egypt and Hashemite Jordan.
So, whereas you are correct to suggest that stability in the Middle East is always questionable, Mudar’s Jordan Republic will have no hesitancy in seizing the initiative against the Islamist factions which are currently growing stronger, because they are just as motivated to act against him as he would be to act against them. In fact, their days in Jordan are numbered specifically due to the destabilizing/pro-Iranian effect which their growing power is having on Jordan, which is contrary to the interests of Israel, the US and the entire moderate Sunni world, something which Amiad Cohen stated clearly in a recent interview with Glick. The Hashemites have no future in Jordan, and the Islamist power there must be eliminated, and when this is done, Jordan will become a far less radical cesspool over time, particularly under the rule of Mudar and the sweeping changes which his rule will bring to both Jordan and the region.
Wasn’t one cause of the spread of WW I the multiplicity of treaties between countries, many of them secret? It’s like watching the spread of fire after setting one corner of a sheet of paper alight. Alliances are dangerous for all those involved, unless they are absolutely in lockstep with their principles and priorities.
@Peloni
I agree except in the case of Israel, even bilateral treaties become one-sided shackles for Israel.
Take Jordan for example, In the 20 year period between Israel’s defeat of Jordan and the signing of the bilateral treaty, can you name a single Jordanian provocation? By contrast, how long did it take after the signing of the treaty for just the horrific first of a string of them to take place, “The Island of Peace Massacre.” And, the Jordanian Prime Minister who signed the treaty said only a few years ago that if the balance of power were to shift, Jordan wouldn’t hesitate to invade Israel again.
And, now Egypt. Troops massing on the border, terror tunnels to resupply Hamas. Treaties don’t work for Israel. There should be just de facto arrangements.
The current de facto arrangement with Saudi Arabia is just fine for now. The price to pay for full recognition that will be demanded of Israel is too high, unnecessary, and counterproductive, in my opinion, especially considering that every Muslim Arab regime is a house of cards built on sand which only represents one faction that maintains its power by force until it’s blown away overnight like Mubarak’s Egypt and Assad’s Syria. Incidentally, this is the flaw in the Jordan Option. As in the case of Saudi Arabia, one man stands in the way of the Muslim Brotherhood or some other jihadist faction taking power with popular support and if anything happens to him, its goodbye charlie.
Only unpredictability and fear of crossing Israel will preserve the peace. Remember when Al Qaeda apologized to Israel for accidentally firing on IDF personnel? This is the quality, that enables Trump to smooth the ruffled waters when dealing with barbarians and the fools who insist on appeasing them thinking the shark will eat them last. In other words. Israel should answer hudna with hudna.
And then, to quote from the movie, “The Godfather (1972) :
“Make them an offer they can’t refuse.”
@Sebastien
I agree completely. These supra-national organizations supplant the sovereignty of member states, making their every decree arbitrary with respect to the sovereign people of the relative member states. The best example of this usurpation of national sovereignty can be seen on a daily basis in the EU, but it is true of all such supra-national organizations whose authority does not require complete consent from the people of each member state.
Instead of these globalist inclined conglomerates of power, each nation-state should make such bilateral treaties as benefit their national interests and their public’s safety and prosperity. Doing otherwise invites the rule by tyrants over people who have no right or recourse against the supranational elements which fill these supranational organizations. Whereas representative govts have acted to enslave their people to the will of these organizations, it resides with the people to resist this tyranny as needed to restore their ability to control their own fate based on the political arrangements, be they as the are, within each nation-state – and there should be no higher order of authority than this.
@Donaldo Or, as is more likely, it would screw up Israel which would be in a mutual defense pact with Turkey. The problem with all these international pacts and courts, institutions, and treaties is that they are only ever enforced against Israel even on specious grounds and never against Israel’s enemies. I say scrap the lot of them, every single one since the end of the Second World War. Their only function is to tie Israel’s hands.
How? That is the question. There is no legal mechanism for expelling a member of NATO.
If Turkey can be in NATO, perhaps Israel can too. Wouldn’t that screw up Erogan.
Turkey is complicated. On one hand, Turkey really should be expelled from NATO. They are not a team player, and have been a problem more than once. They are a lone wolf, and a loose canon.
Most notably, Turkey was kicked out of the F-35 program in 2019, because they insisted on buying the S-400 air defense system from Russia. Integrating the two systems, which is one of the important functionalities of the F-35, would have been technically problematic, but from a security standpoint, it would have given Russian technicians and engineers access to the F-35’s classified systems.
Then, there is Turkey’s genocidal fixation with the Kurds, who are US allies, and who bore the brunt of much of the fighting in the defeat of ISIS. Similarly, Turkey is becoming more bellicose in its rhetoric and actions towards Israel, a major American ally. Turkey is to one extent or another a sponsor, and a host, to several Islamic terrorist groups. Turkey also has poor relations with its neighbors Greece and South Cyprus. Now, it is aggressively expanding into Syria, appropriating land for its renewed Ottoman Empire.
So, one may ask, why keep them around? There is an old saying, “Keep your friends close, and your enemies, closer”. NATO membership may provide at least some level of restraint to this loose canon. If Turkey was booted out, that might push them into “the other camp”, closer to Russia, China and Iran. Given Turkey’s strategic position, and its relatively powerful armed forces, that’s not a good idea.
Lastly, I recently read that no member of NATO can be expelled without a 100% unanimous vote. That would include Turkey, itself. As long as Turkey finds some value in being a member of NATO, it’s unlikely that it will vote itself out.
Bottom line: Turkey should be OUT of NATO, but their exit is unlikely. If it ever did happen, particularly under acrimonius circumstances, it could have very undesirable results. It’s like marrying into a family where your brother-in-law is a mobster. Bad example, I know, but that’s the best I could come up with.