Long thread warning

The developments unfolding in eastern Ukraine are a very complicated and complex issue for Turkish foreign policy on many levels. Ankara's relationship with Kiev has blossomed over the past decade. Bilateral trade is quickly increasing, with a $10bn target.
A free trade agreement is in the works. Both sides have agreed on passport-free travel and their is strong defense industry cooperation as well ranging from drones, corvettes and jet engines. The Crimea issue is also very important as Turks view Crimean Tatars as their brethren.
On the other hand you have Russia, a country that is an important economic partner and projects power in many areas Turkey does. Many Americans want to see the Turkey-Russia relationship as black and white but the reality is its many shades of grey.
On a bilateral level there are many areas of cooperation ranging from defense industry and tourism to energy and agriculture and this adds depth to the relationship. But, there are also serious flashpoints like the annexation of Crimea and Moscow's support for Assad.
These divergences and competition in the same region will always keep Turkey from acting in a bloc formation with Russia or being part of a Russian camp. But, strong economic, defense and energy interests will limit Turkey's risk appetite to take strong action against Moscow.
The US needs to distinguish between the bilateral nature of the Turkey-Russia relationship and the clashing of their foreign policies in different theaters. Unless Washington can provide serious economic alternatives for Ankara, it needs to be more flexible.
Then there's the NATO dimension to what's unfolding in eastern Ukraine. I believe this will be one of the biggest tests for the alliance. After the diplomatic beaten by the Chinese in Alaska and strong posturing by Beijing towards Taiwan - Putin is testing NATO in Ukraine.
Is the Alliance strong, can it back up its rhetoric and is it dynamic? Is Biden the coalition builder he claims to be? Moscow has made inroads with NATO member states. Nordstream 2 is important for Germany's energy security, the Russia-France relationship is growing as well.
As the world shifts to a multipolar order, more and more NATO members will inevitably establish and improve their relations with Moscow and Beijing. Biden has a lot of work to do to shore up the alliance. I think the UK will be an important X factor for NATO.
The US will need a decisive UK standing next to it to revive the alliance. If eastern Ukraine heats up, I do not expect Turkey to directly involve itself in a kinetic engagement against Russia in support of Ukraine. If we look at the past 5 years ie. Syria and Libya,
Turkey has kept military engagement with Russia on a proxy level and avoided direct confrontation. This has provided room to manage the relationship through difficult times. But, if NATO decides to take action and give strong support to Ukraine,
And there is wide participation then this could open the door for Turkey to participate under the NATO umbrella. Turkey has taken part in Rapid Trident drills before and its geopolitical location on the Black Sea and the Bosphorus is strategic.
Transit through Turkey's straits are very important for Russia as they're the only outlet to the Med. The Montreuax Convention Regarding the Regime of Straits has been discussed in Russian media over the past couple days especially with US warships set to enter the Black Sea.
It's also important to look at events from a Russian perspective as well. Moscow sees NATO presence constantly expanding towards its borders and naturally they view it as a nation security threat. If this tense situation is to be diffused diplomatically, empathy is necessary.
It's been a long thread and if you're expecting a fantastic policy recommendation from me to solve this, sorry to disappoint. This situation is very complicated and multi-dimensional. Geopolitically its much bigger than just a Ukraine-Russia issue.
This is a test of NATO's deterrence capacity and capabilities. If the alliance fails this test, it will have future ramifications on Baltic security and the enhanced forward presence of the alliance.
The quicker Washington starts accepting multipolar realities, the quicker it can begin to recalibrate the alliance. The US needs to have sincere conversations with its allies and go back to looking at the big picture. The simplest example is CAATSA.
Turkey currently has sanctions imposed on it. India and Egypt and NordStream 2 which is important for Germany's energy security may soon be sanctioned as well. How can the US hope to contain Russia and China when your sanctioning your strongest allies in Europe, North Africa,
The Middle East and Southeast Asia? Who is Washington going to work with? I don't want to get carried away and turn this into a CAATSA thread. But, actions like this and the asymmetric nature the US conducts diplomacy is eroding confidence in its leadership.
The EU is already establishing a policy based on strategic autonomy and Turkey has its own independent foreign policy. For NATO to become effective the US needs to take its allies positions into account.
In 9 days it will be 3 months since Biden was sworn in as POTUS. He has yet to call the President of NATO's second largest army. During this period, Putin has called Erdogan 3 times and had a video conference and the Chinese Foreign Minister visited Turkey.
While the US sleeps, its rivals are working overtime. Relationships don't magically heal themselves. Both Russia and China are important countries for Turkey. They are blossoming relationships. But, that doesn't change the fact that Turkey has been a NATO member for 7 decades.
NATO is still very deeply ingrained into Turkey's DNA and its threat perception is still inline with the transatlantic views. Ukraine and especially Crimea, are very important security issues for Turkey. Rallying the alliance over these issues can reactive that DNA.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Yusuf Erim

Yusuf Erim Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @YusufErim34

3 Dec 20
A great blog post by the EU's top diplomat on Europe's strategic autonomy. There are a couple areas I don't agree with though. This quote here: "no one advocates the development of a fully autonomous European force outside NATO". President Macron is a big advocate for an EU Army.
Frankly, I don't see how an EU Army and NATO can coexist. This seems problematic, especially with a Biden administration coming soon. I also don't agree with the Astanisation segment either. 👇
"In conflicts like Nagorno-Karabakh, Libya and Syria, we're witnessing a form of “Astanisation” of regional conflicts (reference to the Astana format on Syria) which leads to the exclusion of Europe from the settlement of regional conflicts in favour of Russia and Turkey."
Read 7 tweets
22 Feb 20
Thursday's clash between Turkish/Rebel troops and Regime/Russian forces in #Idlib taught us many things:

1) a small unit of Turkish troops made quick work of the SAA, basically taking control of Nayrab in 60-90 minutes. Turkey lost 2 soldiers while over 150 SAA were neutralized.
2) escalation is incremental. If Russia needed to deploy an airstrike in Nayrab - it was a last resort. Turkey has now seen how weak the SAA is and the extent Russia will support Assad.
3) Russia's hoping the airstrike will be a message/deterrence, create negative Turkish public sentiment and trigger opposition to Turkey's upcoming operation. The Kremlin knows this isn't sustainable action as it will severe ties with Ankara and garner int'l support for Turkey.
Read 12 tweets
9 Jan 20
Yesterday's Libya ceasefire deal clearly displays that Turkey's presence in the north African country is a peacekeeping mission and not an aggressive intervention. The ball is now in Hafter's court - will he honor the deal amd move towards a political solution process... 1/2
... or live up to his Warlord title. Reactions from Egypt and the UAE will be interesting to follow. Expecting Sisi and MbZ to hail a ceasefire as a major breakthrough on the surface but behind closed doors both must be fuming as Turkey has now cemented itself as the major actor.
The ceasefire puts Hafter in a precarious position, honor it and fall short of dictatorial ambitions, break the ceasefire and risk the ire of Erdogan and Putin as well as a larger Turkish troop presence.

The EU probably has mixed feelings. 1) Happy on one side for a ceasefire.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!