1 hour ago
image source,Getty Images
Sweden and Finland have applied to join NATO, but Turkey has objected, citing their opposition to Turkey’s stance once morest Kurdish militant groups.
Sweden and Finland have applied to join NATO, but Turkey has opposed their applications. Why?
Sweden and Finland have formally submitted their applications to join the Western military alliance NATO.
The decision is a fundamental shift from the two countries’ previous historically traditional neutral policies towards NATO, triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the geographic proximity of the two Nordic countries to Russia.
But Turkey soon objected, citing the two countries’ opposition to Turkey’s stance once morest Kurdish militant groups such as the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) active in Turkey and the region.
NATO requires a consensus of all 30 existing members before others can join.
But what is the reason behind Turkey’s opposition? Is there any wiggle room?
Here’s what you need to know.
Why does Turkey oppose Sweden and Finland joining NATO?
Turkey, a NATO member since 1952, has traditionally supported NATO’s open-door policy to new allies, including its eastward expansion to the borders of Russian territory in 1999 and 2004.
image source,Getty
Sweden and Finland have formally submitted applications to join the Western military alliance NATO, a fundamental change in their traditional neutral policy.
But Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused Finland and Sweden of not supporting its fight once morest the PKK, which Turkey has designated a terrorist organization, and the Syrian Kurdish People’s Protection Forces.
The PKK has also been designated a “terrorist organization” by the European Union, the United Kingdom and the United States. But the Syrian Kurdish YPG, affiliated with the PKK, is the main partner of the US-led coalition in the fight once morest ISIS in northern Syria.
Ankara said both Sweden and Finland sheltered PKK members.
The two countries also imposed an arms embargo on Turkey in 2019 following Turkey launched a military offensive once morest the Syrian Kurdish YPG in northern Syria.
Sinan Urgen, a former Turkish diplomat and visiting scholar at the Carnegie European Center in Brussels, said Ankara had unresolved “legitimate concerns” that it wanted to address before Finland and Sweden joined NATO.
“Turkey has some legitimate grievances, especially with Sweden’s position,” Urgen told the BBC.
He said: “It’s really regarding Stockholm’s position on the activities of the PKK and PKK-linked entities, and its support for the Syrian PKK, which is seen in Turkey as the PKK’s branch.”
Turkey also claims that Sweden has refused to extradite 21 people “on suspicion of terrorism links” and Finland has refused to extradite 12.
“Over the years, Turkey has made many demands that have not been resolved, and now Turkey believes that since Sweden is interested in joining NATO, it can impose conditions on Sweden,” Urgen said.
Why is Turkey also talking regarding Greece?
The current debate also raises a thorny issue that has persisted since Turkey sent troops to Northern Cyprus in 1974.
image source,Getty Images
Sweden and Finland imposed arms embargoes on Turkey in 2019 over Turkey’s crackdown on Kurdish militants backing U.S.-allied forces in Syria.
In 1974, Greece decided to withdraw from NATO in protest of NATO’s decision not to act once morest what Greece and some other countries see as a Turkish invasion.
But Greece decided to return to NATO in the 1980s, and Turkey did not object.
Professor Japlak Gursoy, Chair of Contemporary Turkey Studies at the London School of Economics (LSE), said Ankara saw this as a mistake and it did not want to repeat it.
“There is a general belief among the Turks that if Ankara had insisted on not restoring Greece to NATO membership, perhaps some of the problems Turkey and Greece are now facing might be resolved,” Professor Gulsoy told the BBC.
“Now, given that Greece and Cyprus are EU members, they have more diplomatic clout, while Turkey loses an important equal opportunity,” she said.
“So Turkey sees this as an important lesson and it doesn’t want to make the same mistake once more,” she added.
What does Turkey want?
Despite President Erdogan’s opposition to Sweden and Finland joining NATO, many analysts believe he is willing to negotiate and eventually agree to expand the NATO alliance.
Mr. Urgen believes that what Turkey wants to do is to put pressure on Sweden, especially to change its stance on the PKK and its activities.
image source,Getty Images
Secretary of State Blinken meets with Turkish Foreign Minister Cavusoglu. Blinken believes that the differences between Turkey and NATO can be settled.
According to Professor Gulsoy: “Turkey has gained significant leverage and understandably wants to use this opportunity to demand something in return.”
“Turkey is using this opportunity to remind allies of its own international and domestic security concerns and to speak out so that its demands will be heard,” she said.
Turkish Foreign Minister Cavusoglu visited the US in mid-May and met with US Secretary of State Blinken, which was also an opportunity to discuss the matter in a timely manner.
Ankara is reportedly looking to buy 40 new F-16 fighter jets and 80 modernized upgrades for its existing fighter jets in exchange for its investment in America’s most advanced F-35 stealth fighter jet.
Turkey has been excluded from the U.S. sale of the F-35 following Ankara bought the Russian S-400 anti-missile system.
Before the meeting, Blinken said he was very confident in reaching a consensus with Turkey on its opposition to the Nordic countries joining NATO, citing ongoing dialogue between Turkey, Sweden and Finland.
Galip Dalay, an associate research fellow in the Middle East and North Africa programme at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, told the BBC that Erdogan’s position was actually a signal of dissatisfaction and that there was “room for manoeuvre” on the issue.
He said he believed that active diplomatic consultations between Turkey, NATO, Sweden and Finland might be foreseen ahead of the NATO summit in Madrid at the end of June.
But Mr Dalay added that if there was no resolution by June 30, it would essentially be a crisis. This is not only a crisis between Sweden and Finland, but more importantly a crisis between Turkey and NATO.
image source,EPA
NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg said in accepting the application that Finland and Sweden are NATO’s closest partners.
Has there been such a disagreement before?
In its 73-year history, NATO has divided itself on a variety of issues.
More recently, Greece blocked Macedonia from joining NATO for a decade because Athens believed the Balkan country’s name was an attempt to steal Greece’s historical heritage.
After the Macedonian government officially changed its constitutional name to North Macedonia, Greece finally agreed to NATO’s admission of North Macedonia.
In 2009, Turkey protested the appointment of former Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen as NATO head. Ankara accused Rasmussen of “poor leadership” during the 2006 Prophet Muhammad cartoon crisis.
Danish artist Kurt Westergaard sparked outrage in the Muslim world with a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad.
Rasmussen’s appointment was agreed to following lengthy negotiations that saw Turkey gain a prominent position in the coalition’s political and military structure.
What might happen next?
Following the formal application, a membership agreement will be prepared and presented to the NATO allies.
Normally, joining NATO requires long-term negotiations. But given the current geopolitical backdrop, Sweden and Finland are expected to experience a faster process, with the technical process expected to be completed before the Madrid summit.
NATO leaders are expected to approve applications for Sweden and Finland to join during the summit, but the decision must be approved by all 30 national parliaments.
Finland and Sweden have several factors in their favor: they are long-term NATO partners and are advanced democracies with highly capable militaries.
NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg said in accepting the application that Finland and Sweden are NATO’s closest partners and that Finland and Sweden’s membership in NATO will increase NATO’s mutual security.
Mark Green, a former U.S. ambassador and chairman and CEO of the Woodrow International Center for Scholars, said the joint contribution of Sweden and Finland to NATO would greatly enhance NATO’s capabilities.
He told the BBC: “Remember that NATO is a defence mechanism. It only works when Russia invades NATO territory. So it is important that we build these forces. There is no point in doing it followingwards. “
