Sweden and Finland Nato move sparks criticism

While Russian leader Vladimir Putin had relented to the prospect of Sweden and Finland joining Nato – the basic reason why Russia went to war in Ukraine was to object to Ukraine joining Nato – after initial sharp reaction that there could be repercussions for Sweden and Finland, and especially for Finland. But Turkey has taken a tougher stand, though for very different reasons than that of Russia.

Russia fears encirclement by Nato. Turkey, a member of Nato, and the entry of new members needs to get a unanimous approval of the 30-member Western military alliance, objects to Sweden and Finland harbouring Kurdish separatists represented by the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and followers of Fethullah Gulen, the suspected mastermind behind the aborted coup of 2016. Turkey says that elements of PKK and the Gulen group are even part of the respective parliaments. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has described them as “hatcheries of terrorism”

The Kurdish PKK has been waging a war of terror against the Turkish state for Kurdish rights. Turkish government says that Turkey does not discriminate against the Kurds, their language and culture. The Swedish and Finnish governmental representatives were planning to travel to Ankara to explain and discuss, but Erdogan has dismissed it as a waste of time.

The difference between the Russian and Turkish opposition to expansion of Nato is this. Russia perceives an expanded Nato as a security threat to Russia. Turkey is not opposed to expansion of Nato, but it objects to Sweden and Finland because it feels that these two countries are supporting Turkish dissidents and alleges that they are using terrorism against Turkey. As Nato is a military alliance with security concerns, it does make sense that Turkey is expressing concerns about the challenges posed to the country’s security.

In more ways than one, Turkey stands as an outsider to Europe. As the origin of the Eastern Roman Empire with Constantinople as its capital, Turkey, which then was not Turkey, was indeed part of Europe and the West. And there is a second reason Turkey felt that it was part of Europe. It was the modernization project carried out by Kemal Ataturk which modelled itself on European modernity. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk romanised the script of the Turkish language. And for years, Turkey had sought membership of the European Union (EU) but was refused membership on the tacit grounds that Turkey was neither European nor Christian.

It is only in the last decade or so that President Erdogan and Turkey had turned away from economic and political integration with Europe. Turkey had however become a member of the Nato which was set up in the aftermath of the Second World War and in the early years of the Cold War because it was led by the United States, and the Americans were seeking a broader anti-communist military alliance. Turkey is a key ally of America more than that of Europe.

For pragmatic reasons, the European members of Nato have not objected to the presence of Turkey. It has to be seen how the European members of Nato would take to Turkey’s objections because Europe feels that more members of the continent should be part of the military grouping. Will Turkey’s objections weigh? The Americans may have to mediate between Turkey’s concerns and Europe’s need to expand Nato. Sooner than later, the EU and Nato will become coterminous, and Turkey will remain the odd outsider. Turkey is now keen to become part of West Asian geopolitical situation. But there are challenges. For example, Turkey has the largest Syrian refugees on its territory, and it almost acts as a barrier to migrants wanting to move into Europe.