Well-known Turkish strategist: "Turkey is a more important country for NATO"

Turan: 70 years have passed since Turkey became a member of NATO. We learn from the memoirs of the third president, Celal Bayar, that Turkey had been trying to join NATO since 1949, but was able to do so three years later. Why do you think the issue of membership in the organization was delayed for three years?

Çitlioğlu: Initially, Turkey's membership in NATO was not welcomed by member states, especially the United States. Because if Turkey became a member, NATO and the USSR would become border neighbors, and this would create additional tension. On the other hand, the vast majority of the population of Western countries were reluctant to allow a Muslim country to join NATO. After the end of World War II, the USSR demanded territory from Turkey, which included territories from Kars and Ardahan, along with Istanbul and the Çanakkale Strait. After Turkey took part in the Korean War on the side of the United States, the demand to enter under the security umbrella of NATO was accepted. This means that the hesitations of the West had already gone.

Turan: One of the issues discussed so far is the question "What did NATO give to Turkey and what did it not give?" We want to know your opinion on this issue as an expert with years of experience.

Ercan  Çitlioğu and Mayis Alizade

Çitlioğlu: As it is known, on the southeastern side of NATO, Turkey and Greece have acted as a barrier to the expansionist policy of the USSR for many years. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the lack of this barrier weakened Turkey's position. However, due to the events of recent years, the importance of Turkey has increased again. Although Turkey maintains its weight in Europe as the largest army in Europe, problems with relations with the United States have led to the modernization of the armed forces, especially in the field of air defense systems, and the cessation of cooperation in some areas. However, in each union and signed agreement, the parties must make mutual concessions, which are required by the conditions. But Turkey's benefits to NATO outweigh NATO’s benefits to Turkey. The formation of all Turkish military units, except for the Fourth Army, within the framework of NATO principles, has sometimes created problems in national planning, and the use of NATO-provided weapons in the fight against terrorism has often led to disagreements.

Turan: What would you say about the benefits of Turkey's membership in NATO during the Cold War?

Çitlioğlu: According to Article V of the Charter, Turkey's membership in NATO has helped to curb the USSR's threats against Turkey. Turkey's inclusion in the collective defense agreement forced the USSR to be more lenient with Turkey at the time.

Turan: Should we say that Turkey's position in NATO has strengthened after the Cold War?

Çitlioğlu: Looking at NATO's strategic documents and expansion plans, especially after the Warsaw Pact became history, discussions had begun that Turkey was not the important country as before. However, the ongoing process in the Middle East, Turkey's geographical position on energy sources and energy transmission routes, the events in Iran and Iraq, the growing importance of Central Asia, and Turkey's historical and cultural ties in the Balkans have once again shown that Turkey is an indispensable country for NATO.

Turan: In particular, has Turkey gained anything from the AKP government's disagreements with NATO in the last 6-7 years?

Çitlioğlu: There were losses instead of gains. In particular, it is possible to talk about the negative impact of ongoing tensions and restrictions that began with the purchase of S-400 missiles, the withdrawal of Turkey from the F-35 project, which is very important for the effectiveness of the military air force, and the failure to sell the necessary parts for the modernization of F-16s on the operational capacity of the Turkish armed forces and the country's defense capabilities. However, it should also be noted that these restrictions have been useful for Turkey to expand its defense capabilities. I think it is more accurate to describe the situation here than to argue about who is right or who is wrong.

Turan: An international conference dedicated to the 70th anniversary of Turkey's membership in NATO will be held in Istanbul on May 25-27. An important anniversary is celebrated at an important time. What would you like to say about the conference?

Çitlioğlu: Considering that the history of some countries is not even seventy years, the fact that Turkey's membership in NATO has reached seventy years shows the commitment to mutual obligations. Today, unions are often formed and quickly disbanded, so it is very important to be a member of a union for seventy years. We will hold a conference in Istanbul on May 25-27 with the participation of speakers from 39 countries. Along with the 70th anniversary of Turkey's membership in NATO, regional and global issues will be discussed there. At this year's conference, we will bring together representatives of countries with which there are problems. For example, representatives of Israel and Iran, Azerbaijan and Armenia, Turkey and the TRNC and Greece, Russia and the United States and the United Kingdom, as well as Turkey and Egypt, will take part in the discussions in the same hall. Our goal is to achieve lasting peace and mutual agreement.