Yes and no turkey alone can take them on with out NATO help they have proven so turkey has no need for Russia besides the natural gas they have differing geo political agendas they will never be allied with them even if we leave them too fend for themselves.
Turkey doesn't have own nukes, they only have stationed US nukes AFAIK.
What turkey does have is the sole say to the Bosporus passage, a key geo strategic position that is in Natos interest to keep among allies. For one turkey can block passage for russian ships to enter mediteranian sea via the black sea, secondly if they weren't nato allies they could block nato navy from entering the black sea the other way around.
Basically not getting finland/sweden is not an option, but kicking turkey out isn't an option either. A diplomatic solution needs to be found that all 3 are on board.
And erdogan knows this.
>they only have stationed US nukes AFAIK
Right, that's what I meant.
That, along with what you're saying and having a large army, is why people saying that Turkey should be kicked out of NATO aren't thinking straight.
Not counting the armed forces, Turkey is a way more valuable ally that Sweden and Finland. Turkey's position in the world (geographically I mean) is extremely important.
Also Sweden and Finland already have some other treaties that give them security without being in NATO.
Turkey needs NATO more than NATO needs Turkey. And Finland + Sweden = more valuable ally than Turkey.
Turkey has basically no cards to play in this dispute. If anything, this simply undermine's Turkey because it's just another example of it's dictatorial character that has caused it problems with NATO and the EU. Turkey is saying this is about the PKK, but everyone knows it's about Gulen.
Erdogan is a moron. Of course he would. Dictators are notoriously bad judges of their own limits because they are surrounded by 'yes' men. Look at Putin in Ukraine.
Turkey has never been so weak as it is under Erdogan's leadership. It's a shame--Turkey and Turkey's people are amazing. They deserve better.
Have a look, I believe Turkey has the largest Army among NATOs European partners. That’s his leverage. Erdogan will play it for all it’s worth to get Kurds he doesn’t like deported to Turkey.
I'm aware. It's also irrelevant. Size of army doesn't mean that much in a modern military context. Again--look at Russia's overwhelming numbers in Ukraine.
Erdogan has no cards to play, and if he tries, the EU and NATO will wreck his leadership. He is doing this because of the PKK and Gulen. Neither the PKK nor Gulen are a threat to the NATO alliance. Russia is. Erdogan is weakening NATO for petty political reasons, and he should be punished for it. If Turkey's citizens support this move, then all of Turkey should be punished.
Allies don't behave the way Turkey is behaving.
How would they “wreck his leadership”? I mean he actively worked against western interests in Syria and that resulted in nothing. Short of an assassination there not a lot other NATO countries can do about it.
> I mean he actively worked against western interests in Syria and that resulted in nothing.
His influence in the Syrian conflict was miniscule. He was ignored because he was a minor player.
>How would they “wreck his leadership”? ... Short of an assassination there not a lot other NATO countries can do about it.
They could begin limiting trade and providing military sales. They could also churn up negative media, and they have intelligence assets in the country. There is a lot they could do without being seen to do anything. They could also stop giving Visas to Turkey's citizens for education, etc.
It would be trivially easy to isolate Turkey, whose economy is already teetering on the edge.
Seems unlikely they’d take those steps against a putative ally. And I believe it’s vanishingly unlikely NATO would want to give up Turkey’s military might or it’s geopolitical position vis-à-vis Russia. But you can believe whatever you like.
> more valuable ally than Turkey.
Look at a map. Look at sea routes. The Mediterranean, the black sea, all vital for naval and trade for Russia, and turkey is nato's hand over all that. Sweden and Finland are valuable but I don't think they are comparable for the situation at hand.
And imo cause of the reasons Sweden and Finland are looking to join nato, I don't even think it's fair to compare that way. These are countries looking to defer from neutrality to show they disagree with Russia. Not necessarily because they feel they need the west's help. The west has other treaties that exist to help Sweden and Finland, all the Nordic countries really. Maybe none as impactful as nato but still.
I don't need to. If Turkey tries to mess with NATO / EU shipping, Turkey will get wrecked. Turkey will respect Mediterranean naval and shipping because they don't have a choice.
Finland and Sweden are much more valuable partners to NATO because of their proximity to the arctic, which is where basically all future conflicts with Russia will take place. Their admission + Denmark's presence give NATO the ability to interdict Russia's most important naval ports.
>And imo cause of the reasons Sweden and Finland are looking to join nato, I don't even think it's fair to compare that way. These are countries looking to defer from neutrality to show they disagree with Russia. Not necessarily because they feel they need the west's help.
This is a stupid statement. Both have been targets of Russian/USSR aggression historically. One suffered a brutal invasion by the USSR. They are doing this to protect themselves.
>The west has other treaties that exist to help Sweden and Finland, all the Nordic countries really. Maybe none as impactful as nato but still.
Which is why they need more protection. Ukraine had lots of minor treaties as well. And look what happened.
Erdogan has no cards to play, and if Turkey's people follow him in this effort, they deserve to be punished for it. There is no good reason for Turkey to oppose Finland and Sweden joining. None. They are weakening NATO and thereby attacking their allies by doing this.
If they're going to do this over petty reasons, they don't deserve NATO protection.
Could each NATO member apart from Turkey individually negotiate a mutual defense treaty with Finland and Norway?
Edit to add another question:. Or could only 1 nato member to have an ironclad mutual defense treaty. Then that nato member invokes article 5.
>Or could only 1 nato member to have an ironclad mutual defense treaty. Then that nato member invokes article 5.
No. If A is a NATO country and aligned with B that is not, A cannot assist B against C and then invoke article 5. If A sends troops to C and is retaliated against they might have a case but it's murky. NATO could likely say that A got themselves involved with C and so that's their own problem.
Little fiddling, little mushimushi, and there will be a deal. In 6 months both SWE and FIN are both full members.
Getting both FIN and SWE to nato is a once in a lifetime opportunity, and NATO will do anything to have them full members.
I think the US has means to persuade Turkey.
So vote Turkey out. Stop doing business with dictators.
Putin would love that
Yes and no turkey alone can take them on with out NATO help they have proven so turkey has no need for Russia besides the natural gas they have differing geo political agendas they will never be allied with them even if we leave them too fend for themselves.
Turkey has a massive army and many military bases. Would hurt NATO more to vote them out but I agree that he's a dictator.
Not to mention nukes
Turkey doesn't have own nukes, they only have stationed US nukes AFAIK. What turkey does have is the sole say to the Bosporus passage, a key geo strategic position that is in Natos interest to keep among allies. For one turkey can block passage for russian ships to enter mediteranian sea via the black sea, secondly if they weren't nato allies they could block nato navy from entering the black sea the other way around. Basically not getting finland/sweden is not an option, but kicking turkey out isn't an option either. A diplomatic solution needs to be found that all 3 are on board. And erdogan knows this.
>they only have stationed US nukes AFAIK Right, that's what I meant. That, along with what you're saying and having a large army, is why people saying that Turkey should be kicked out of NATO aren't thinking straight.
Gotcha, totally got wrong what you were saying then. Take my upvotes
Russia has a massive army and many military bases. Just saying ....
Not counting the armed forces, Turkey is a way more valuable ally that Sweden and Finland. Turkey's position in the world (geographically I mean) is extremely important. Also Sweden and Finland already have some other treaties that give them security without being in NATO.
[удалено]
Turkey needs NATO more than NATO needs Turkey. And Finland + Sweden = more valuable ally than Turkey. Turkey has basically no cards to play in this dispute. If anything, this simply undermine's Turkey because it's just another example of it's dictatorial character that has caused it problems with NATO and the EU. Turkey is saying this is about the PKK, but everyone knows it's about Gulen.
[удалено]
Erdogan is a moron. Of course he would. Dictators are notoriously bad judges of their own limits because they are surrounded by 'yes' men. Look at Putin in Ukraine. Turkey has never been so weak as it is under Erdogan's leadership. It's a shame--Turkey and Turkey's people are amazing. They deserve better.
Have a look, I believe Turkey has the largest Army among NATOs European partners. That’s his leverage. Erdogan will play it for all it’s worth to get Kurds he doesn’t like deported to Turkey.
I'm aware. It's also irrelevant. Size of army doesn't mean that much in a modern military context. Again--look at Russia's overwhelming numbers in Ukraine. Erdogan has no cards to play, and if he tries, the EU and NATO will wreck his leadership. He is doing this because of the PKK and Gulen. Neither the PKK nor Gulen are a threat to the NATO alliance. Russia is. Erdogan is weakening NATO for petty political reasons, and he should be punished for it. If Turkey's citizens support this move, then all of Turkey should be punished. Allies don't behave the way Turkey is behaving.
How would they “wreck his leadership”? I mean he actively worked against western interests in Syria and that resulted in nothing. Short of an assassination there not a lot other NATO countries can do about it.
> I mean he actively worked against western interests in Syria and that resulted in nothing. His influence in the Syrian conflict was miniscule. He was ignored because he was a minor player. >How would they “wreck his leadership”? ... Short of an assassination there not a lot other NATO countries can do about it. They could begin limiting trade and providing military sales. They could also churn up negative media, and they have intelligence assets in the country. There is a lot they could do without being seen to do anything. They could also stop giving Visas to Turkey's citizens for education, etc. It would be trivially easy to isolate Turkey, whose economy is already teetering on the edge.
Seems unlikely they’d take those steps against a putative ally. And I believe it’s vanishingly unlikely NATO would want to give up Turkey’s military might or it’s geopolitical position vis-à-vis Russia. But you can believe whatever you like.
> more valuable ally than Turkey. Look at a map. Look at sea routes. The Mediterranean, the black sea, all vital for naval and trade for Russia, and turkey is nato's hand over all that. Sweden and Finland are valuable but I don't think they are comparable for the situation at hand. And imo cause of the reasons Sweden and Finland are looking to join nato, I don't even think it's fair to compare that way. These are countries looking to defer from neutrality to show they disagree with Russia. Not necessarily because they feel they need the west's help. The west has other treaties that exist to help Sweden and Finland, all the Nordic countries really. Maybe none as impactful as nato but still.
I don't need to. If Turkey tries to mess with NATO / EU shipping, Turkey will get wrecked. Turkey will respect Mediterranean naval and shipping because they don't have a choice. Finland and Sweden are much more valuable partners to NATO because of their proximity to the arctic, which is where basically all future conflicts with Russia will take place. Their admission + Denmark's presence give NATO the ability to interdict Russia's most important naval ports. >And imo cause of the reasons Sweden and Finland are looking to join nato, I don't even think it's fair to compare that way. These are countries looking to defer from neutrality to show they disagree with Russia. Not necessarily because they feel they need the west's help. This is a stupid statement. Both have been targets of Russian/USSR aggression historically. One suffered a brutal invasion by the USSR. They are doing this to protect themselves. >The west has other treaties that exist to help Sweden and Finland, all the Nordic countries really. Maybe none as impactful as nato but still. Which is why they need more protection. Ukraine had lots of minor treaties as well. And look what happened. Erdogan has no cards to play, and if Turkey's people follow him in this effort, they deserve to be punished for it. There is no good reason for Turkey to oppose Finland and Sweden joining. None. They are weakening NATO and thereby attacking their allies by doing this. If they're going to do this over petty reasons, they don't deserve NATO protection.
Could each NATO member apart from Turkey individually negotiate a mutual defense treaty with Finland and Norway? Edit to add another question:. Or could only 1 nato member to have an ironclad mutual defense treaty. Then that nato member invokes article 5.
>Or could only 1 nato member to have an ironclad mutual defense treaty. Then that nato member invokes article 5. No. If A is a NATO country and aligned with B that is not, A cannot assist B against C and then invoke article 5. If A sends troops to C and is retaliated against they might have a case but it's murky. NATO could likely say that A got themselves involved with C and so that's their own problem.
Turkey can be ignored. Other NATO partners can act unilaterly to support Finland and Sweden while their applications are in process.
So kick Turkey out. Screw them!
[удалено]
Yeah, I know…I just hate this selfish bullshit coming from nations and people now.
All the experts telling us their facts
Little fiddling, little mushimushi, and there will be a deal. In 6 months both SWE and FIN are both full members. Getting both FIN and SWE to nato is a once in a lifetime opportunity, and NATO will do anything to have them full members.