By Barçın Yinanç
What happens if Donald Trump were to send Delta Force to “get” Greenland?
Would it be the end of NATO, as Denmark’s prime minister suggested?
While the validity of NATO’s Article 5 is questioned, allies feel they can no longer rely on U.S. nuclear protection.
In times of great power competition mid-size regional powers tend to forge alliances to consolidate their security.
As Turkey has never fully trusted the U.S. or European capitals, it might be natural for its decision makers to seek new alliances. Yet new alliances can lead to additional risks instead of consolidating the country’s security.
ANKARA PURSUES SIMILAR PATTERNS
On Jan. 9, Bloomberg published an article headline “Turkey said to seek membership of Saudi - Pakistan defense pact.” The two Turkish journalists who had their bylines on the article are known to be well connected to high-level officials. Put otherwise, when high-level officials want to give a message to a foreign audience, it is either Bloomberg, Reuters or the Turkish representative of Middle East Eye. A similar pattern emerged when reports circulated about Turkey seeking membership in BRICS, although no Turkish official has expressed such an intention on the record.
Usually, the first version of the story presents a maximalist perspective. A few days later it is followed by a more fine-tuned version written by the rival media outlet.
“Turkey is seeking to join the defense alliance between Saudi Arabia and nuclear armed Pakistan,” is the wording from Bloomberg, which attributes the story to “people familiar with the matter,” giving no clues as to whether these people are from the presidential palace, defense or foreign ministries.
The agreement signed by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia last September states that any aggression against one country is considered an attack on the other, mirroring Article 5 of NATO.
“Turkey hunts for new security alliances as regional tensions rise” is the title of the story in Middle East Eye, published four days after Bloomberg. Turkish sources told the Middle East Eye that, “Ankara has drawn closer to Saudi Arabia in recent years,” but “cautioned that it is still too early to speak of a NATO-style alliance between the three countries.
As there is again no clue as to the “sources,” there is enough to confuse foreign observers.
ALLIANCE AND ENEMY AMBIGUITY
As expected, the foreign minister neither denied nor confirmed the reports when asked about the defense pact during his annual press conference on Jan. 15.
He said Turkey is seeking a wider regional security platform than just with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
But the Bloomberg story sparked a limited debate among a group of experts.
The gist of this “search” could be the nuclear deterrence which could be provided by Pakistan, according to a social media post by think tank EDAM’s Director Sinan Ülgen.
“However, the credibility of a defense pact that includes a nuclear dimension depends on the existence of a shared definition of a common enemy. The question should be framed as follows: would Pakistan be willing to risk facing a nuclear strike on Islamabad in order to protect Ankara or Istanbul? And against whom would this protection be directed,” asked Ülgen and added, “Who are our common enemies with these two countries? I could not find an answer.”
Journalist Murat Yetkin appeared to see no problem in the trilateral defense alliance.
“I see no indication that the talks among Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia are aimed at establishing a joint defense pact or laying the groundwork for a so-called Muslim NATO.”
Then he added: “However, if the unique geographical positions of the three countries—combined with Turkey’s combat experience and defense industry, Saudi Arabia’s financial and ideological influence, and Pakistan’s nuclear capability—can generate a genuine synergy, that would be significant. We should also add the effective intelligence structures of all three countries to this equation.”
Such cooperation is still only at the level of an idea, and would not diminish Turkey’s role within NATO, but rather enhance it, according to Yetkin.
Professor Ahmet Kasım Has strongly disagreed. “In multipolar systemic structures, alliances increase the risk of states being drawn into ‘unnecessary’ conflicts stemming from issues that are not essential, vital, or indispensable from their own perspective,” wrote Han, an academic in international relations.
These reports will not go unnoticed by the Emirates and India. And although Turkey is party to the nuclear non-proliferation agreement, suspicions that Turkey’s close relationship is also motivated by a potential aim of acquiring nuclear arms will be strengthened.
