Geopolitical transformations in the international arena and the domestic political crisis in Türkiye have put Turkish diplomacy in a difficult situation. However, Recep Erdogan has gained sufficient experience manoeuvring between different centres of power without harming his interests. We shall see how it will be this time.
Middle East and Europe: Türkiye cannot be left out
Recep Erdogan has already managed to ruin relations with Israel twice. It cannot be said that Erdogan has completely severed ties with Tel Aviv; Ankara retains certain trade contacts with the Jewish state (since 2018, the transit of Azerbaijani oil through Türkiye reaches the Israeli port). However, the obvious success of Turkish diplomacy on the Syrian track in December, 2024, and the rise to power of the pro-Turkish regime in Damascus ‘inspired’ the Turkish side. Türkiye finds the new Syria a reliable military, political and economic ally. Ankara is trying to localise budding Kurdish independence near its borders via the regime under its control, establish control over Syrian oil resources and transit communications, obtain lucrative contracts in the field of construction and reconstruction of the destroyed economy following the conflict, lay a Qatari gas pipeline through Syria to Türkiye and, finally, play a leading role in the Middle East.
The interests of Türkiye and Israel have collided in Syria. Tel Aviv, with the strong support of the Western community led by the United States, continues its military escalation in the region.
The aggression of Hamas within the framework of Operation Al-Aqsa Storm resulted in a crushing defeat of the Palestinians and an attempt to physically expel the entire Arab population from the Gaza Strip. Due to Hezbollah’s participation in the war against Israel, Southern Lebanon was subjected to a military strike by the Israeli army and the destruction of the Shi’a group’s strongholds. The audacious anti-Israeli actions of the Houthis are causing Yemen to become the target of massive military strikes by Israel and the United States. In Syria, Bashar al-Assad was toppled for transit and other assistance to pro-Iranian forces against Israel. Assad not only lost the Golan Heights, but also lost control of the ‘security zone’ in the south of the country. Iran, which tried to form an Islamic resistance front against Israel, got a hybrid war from the Israeli army and special services, and lost the combat capability of Shi’a groups in the region and influence on Damascus. Moreover, Iran remains the target of a possible attack by Israel and the United States if it refuses to accept Washington’s conditions on its nuclear programme.
Meanwhile, Tel Aviv sees President Erdogan’s plans to revive the former glory of the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East and establish his patronage over Syria as a threat to the national security of the Jewish state. Israel will not to concede to Türkiye, and this could lead to the fragmentation of Syria’s territorial integrity as a result of a new regional war. All positive elements of the Turkish army aside, the equipment and combat training of the Israel Defence Forces is still superior. In addition, in the event of a military conflict with Türkiye, Israel will have the full military, political and financial support of the United States, which will deprive Ankara of any hope of success.
In other words, Israel is a strong military opponent for Türkiye, capable not only of defeating the Turks, but also of initiating the collapse of its territorial statehood. Türkiye will have to look for other ways to normalise relations with Israel, where it cannot do without the United States and President Donald Trump’s conditions. Only in this case will Türkiye retain its influence in Middle Eastern affairs.
The escalation of US-European relations, initiated by the new US presidential administration (conflict surrounding trade, the abandonment of the EU’s strategic nuclear protection, the course towards ending the Ukrainian conflict with respect for Russia’s interests), has placed Europe in a security crisis. Being a long-time friend of Türkiye, the UK is currently ping-ponging between the US and EU. Europe is thinking about a new security architecture with the formation of a military structure and ensuring nuclear protection without the US, where France, with its nuclear weapons, can play the leading role.
Türkiye, with its advantageous geography making it an important member of NATO, has provided security for the alliance’s south-eastern flank for more than half a century. Due to its geography and ambitious aspirations to the north-east, Türkiye fully satisfied the interests of the Anglo-Saxons in their confrontation with Russia. Today, London is trying to impose the same ideas on continental Europe so as not to leave Türkiye out of the likely NATO 2.0.
The paradox of the British position boils down to the fact that Türkiye is still focused on integration with the EU. At the same time, the UK itself withdrew from the EU. Is Türkiye capable of providing the EU with a nuclear shield? No. At the same time, Europe has more than enough production and technological capabilities in the military-industrial complex compared to Türkiye.
Largely because of its useless policy towards Russia, modern Europe has driven itself to logistical dependence on Türkiye, which has strategically important energy and transport communications connecting Europe and Asia. For this reason Recep Erdogan correctly notes Türkiye’s importance to the EU: “Europe’s need for our country not only in the field of security, but also in many other areas, including economy, diplomacy and trade, has become openly recognised”.
Türkiye continues to prioritise EU integration. The pragmatic and “rational” Europeans, according to Erdogan, should realise the importance of Türkiye and the expansion of institutional cooperation, taking into account the “rapid and sudden changes taking place on a global scale”.
Also, Türkiye’s membership in a new European military structure is possible under the condition of economic and political integration with the EU or not (as in the case of NATO). At the same time, Türkiye remains be a key military ally of the United States, which is not interested in excessive independence of Europe. In other words, Türkiye’s European (and Middle Eastern) future depends on the United States.
What can Imamoglu do that Erdogan cannot?
There is no doubt that both opponents and allies (including the United States) of Türkiye are paying high attention to President Erdogan’s geopolitical ambitions. The excessive aggressiveness of the current Turkish leader in the Middle East with the threat of conflict with Israel has obviously allowed Washington show to Erdogan the likely vector of internal political changes in Türkiye, betting on the opposition.
Against the background of the social protests in Istanbul following the arrest of Mayor E. Imamoglu, the visit of the Turkish foreign minister to the United States is no coincidence. Fidana. Unlike Paris, Berlin and Brussels, Washington would not express its concern about the opposition’s moves in Istanbul actions if Ankara is ready to support the course of the new administration of President Trump. Secretary of State Mark Rubio stressed the importance of Türkiye as a military ally of the United States, and Donald Trump praised his colleague Recep Erdogan.
The US always sacrifices declarations of freedom and democracy when its national interests are at stake, and Europe is not lagging far behind (it is just still in the rear-guard of US-Russian cooperation in resolving the Ukrainian crisis). Macaron at times declares that the French also want to receive their share of Ukrainian resources; at times he uses the threat of military force (which he does not have in reality).
And the United Kingdom? Keir Starmer and the Labour Party have not yet demonstrated a clear public position on the mayor of Istanbul facing repression. The head of the Republican People’s Party, Ozgur Ozel, even expressed dissatisfaction in this regard. At the same time, protests in support of Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu, who is pro-European, are not prohibited in London.
However, London is well acquainted with Mr. Erdogan and understands that Imamoglu is, so far, only making promises, but Erdogan has already fulfilled his promises more than once; why change horses midstream, so to say. In addition, the British know that Erdogan will accept the conditions of those who choose him.
Alexander SVARANTS – Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor
