What's new

Poll: Should Turkey remain a NATO member ?

Should Turkey remain a NATO member ?


  • Total voters
    72
  • Poll closed .
Why Turkey is part of NATO anyways? how it serves Turkish interests? in case of NATO's conflict with Russia Turkey will be prime target of Russian forces for no reason..

its better to be Major non nato ally with no commitment then becoming part of their wars which does not serve Turkish Interests, meanwhile Turkey should also build better economic. military relationship with China and Russia.. (Independent foreign policy)
 
Last edited:
Why Turkey is part of NATO anyways? how it serves Turkish interests? in case of NATO's conflict with Russia Turkey will be prime target of Russian forces for no reason..

its better to be Major non nato ally with no commitment then becoming part of their wars which does not serve Turkish Interests, meanwhile Turkey should also build better economic. military relationship with China and Russia.. (Independent foreign policy)

I think I understand Turkey's concerns, it is Russian expansionism. There's no way to deny it. I'm not saying that the west is any better. Sometimes you simply cannot remain neutral, you are forced to choose a side or else you get squashed by both sides.
 
Why Turkey is part of NATO anyways? how it serves Turkish interests? in case of NATO's conflict with Russia Turkey will be prime target of Russian forces for no reason..

its better to be Major non nato ally with no commitment then becoming part of their wars which does not serve Turkish Interests, meanwhile Turkey should also build better economic. military relationship with China and Russia.. (Independent foreign policy)
The Gog and Magog led USSR's (perceived) expanisionist designs and plus the historic legacy of wanting to re-conquer Constantinople (not that the Godless USSR actually cared for religion) actually "forced" Turkey to join the Gog and Magog led NATO and thus cement NATO control over the Bosphorous - which is mainly what Turkey was about for NATO.
Should (when) war breaks out, Turkey will be misused. Civil war may happen.

Read Sheikh Imran Hosein's analysis @ http://thesaker.is/the-turkish-coup...with-enough-love-to-last-until-the-great-war/
 
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/07/turexit-turkey-leave-nato-160721105010182.html



Ever since Turkey joined NATO in 1952, Ankara has viewed its membership in alliance as a win-win proposition, where NATO enhances Turkey's security and contributes to its integration with the Euro-Atlantic community, and in return, Turkey assumes its responsibilities in defending the interests of the alliance.

But the past few years have put much strain on the relationship, as NATO proves unable or unwilling to stem the tide of mounting regional instability caused by the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS) group against the backdrop of the civil wars in Iraq and Syria on Turkey's doorsteps.

And last week, the failed coup seemed to deepening distrust between Turkey and its NATO allies.

US Secretary of State John Kerry warned that exploiting the coup to crack down on its detractors and undermine its democracy, could cost Turkey its NATO membership.

But regardless of the seriousness of the US warning - and I think it's not serious - will Ankara continue to be part of NATO, especially when its attempts to join the European Union have all but failed?

Inside Story - Are Turkey's military bases safe after the failed coup?

Asset or burden?
The US has long embraced Turkey as a strategic asset, regardless of the latter's abuse of democracy.

For decades, Washington has maintained close strategic relations with Ankara despite - or thanks to - four military coups, in 1960, 1971, 1980, 1997, and even after its invasion of Cyprus in 1974.

But reading the mainstream Western media gives the impression that Turkey under the Erdogan administration has become hostile to Western interests; a "strategic liability", an "irresponsible loose cannon", or a "reckless, aggressive ally" and a "fifth column".

Is any of this true?

Not according to retired NATO Supreme Allied Commander James Stavridis. He argued in a recent Foreign Policy magazine expose that Turkey has been present in "virtually every NATO operation with significant impact: training Afghan Security Forces and leading coalition efforts in the central district, including Kabul; sending ships and aircraft to Libya; participating in counterpiracy operations; maintaining a steady presence in the security and peacekeeping force in the Balkans".

Contrary to huffs and puffs coming out of Washington and Paris, Turkey's experience shows that its NATO membership guarantees it can do what it pleases internally as long as it serves US and NATO externally.



Moreover, according to Stavridis - who is considered by Hillary Clinton as a running mate - Turkey has an "enormous ability" to influence events, "from the Islamic State to Syria; Israel to oil and gas in the eastern Mediterranean; responding to radical Islam to stability in Egypt".

In short, the record shows that Turkey under the Erdogan administration has been a major NATO asset; indeed, it's been more of a benefactor than benefiter from the alliance.

Enthusiastic member
The Justice and Development Party (AK party) seems as enthusiastic for doing NATO's bidding if not more than its secular nationalist predecessors; or even its Western allies. And it sees a new, greater role for itself and NATO in the Middle East moving forward.

Since NATO's first "out of area" operations in Afghanistan in 2001, Turkey has argued that it's best situated to contribute to such interventions considering the instability in the greater Middle East area.

OPINION: Turkey US - What's the problem?

Former Turkish Foreign and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu went further to urge Europe to support change in the Middle East as it did in Eastern Europe, and vowing that "Turkey will continue to be an asset and an influential actor within NATO if future needs arise, or further NATO involvement in the Middle East" (PDF).

But that, in my view, is not necessarily constructive for Turkey or the Middle East region. Certainly not after the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and not when Turkey is treated as a foot soldier in an alliance of powerful Western states.

OPINION: Turkey - Coup 'silence' and pointing fingers at the West

Despite repeated terrorist attacks in Istanbul and other Turkish cities, Turks feel as though their specific worries and interests are "not respected" within the North Atlantic Council.

Instead of being friends and allies on equal terms, the US and its European allies continue to speak down at Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Turkey - most recently France's foreign minister, who was told to mind his own business.

All of which begs the question: what happens if Ankara is suspended or it breaks away from the alliance?

The alternative and its consequences
If Turkey leaves NATO, the risks to its security are minimal. It has a bigger military and higher defence spending than any one of its neighbours or its NATO allies, with the exception of the US.

True, its relations with its neighbours aren't great, but Ankara has tried to improve them over the past few weeks and months, especially by mending fences with Israel and Russia.

In fact, before the coup, Turkey was reportedly heading, once again, towards a more pragmatic non-interventionist "zero-problems" diplomacy towards its neighbours.

eb32c7ed65b0491f9570b0d4d6cd2c47_18.jpg

Member countries' flags are seen in front of the NATO headquarters in Brussels, Belgium [Getty]
But one can't say the same for NATO; the alliance will suffer if Turkey quits.

First, it'll be exposed for being a military club of influential, predominantly Christian nations with grave consequences to its out-of-area operations.

Second, NATO will find it far more challenging, if not totally improbable, to win the war against ISIL.

Third, if Turkey were to destabilise, the repercussions would be grave for Europe, and could potentially strengthen ISIL.

Fourth, It will embolden Russia to act more aggressively in the region. And fifth, the US and NATO would lose their five major military facilities in Turkey.

So will Turkey leave NATO?
Realistically, Turkey doesn't have solid alternative options to NATO or the EU.

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is more of a forum than anything resembling an alliance. And the same goes for BRICS.

Yet, for all the practical purposes, the Erdogan administration has almost given up on its EU membership in frustration, and is moving further away from it as it rejects the EU's demands to revise its anti-terror laws and potentially legalise capital punishment.


But Ankara will hang tight to its NATO membership - more for its political than military benefits.

Contrary to huffs and puffs coming out of Washington and Paris, Turkey's experience shows that its NATO membership guarantees it can do what it pleases internally as long as it serves US and NATO externally.

Judging from President Barack Obama's phone call to President Erdogan this week, the US is holding tight to its Turkish ally. Likewise, if Admiral Starvidis's recommendations are anything to go by, so will Clinton.

So as Erdogan strengthens his grip over the country's military and political establishment, Turkey and NATO will continue to embrace each other, and probably increase visit exchanges, improve their lines of communications and intensify the cooperation against ISIL.

Marwan Bishara is the senior political analyst at Al Jazeera. Follow him on Facebook.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

Source: Al Jazeera

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"NATO will move on" -Brain dead PDF members:rofl:
 
since turkey is an important link between the eu and the middle east, i think turkey is pretty important to nato :0
 
I voted "no" by mistake..:( Turkey should not be "thrown" out of NATO.

Anyway, the better question is "Can Turkey afford being outside of NATO?" You're very short on friends as it is, and Russia is just around the corner.
Remember that if Turkey didn't join NATO in the first place things might have played a lot differently for them. That was the reason they joined.
 
I voted "no" by mistake..:( Turkey should not be "thrown" out of NATO.

Anyway, the better question is "Can Turkey afford being outside of NATO?" You're very short on friends as it is, and Russia is just around the corner.
Remember that if Turkey didn't join NATO in the first place things might have played a lot differently for them. That was the reason they joined.
Turkey isnt leaving NATO anytime soon...but the relationship will be different, no more blank checks to the US and the rest when it comes to our national security concerns. I also expect our journey to the EU that died around 2007 with Sarkozys arrogance and Merkels hositlity will finally,thank god, be declared dead so the dickheads in Brussels can stop talking down to us with regards to our internal affairs.

Also I expect a more independent foreign policy and more economic deals with Asian and southeast asian countries...our dependence on EU investment has to be slashed down, immediately
 
Turkey isnt leaving NATO anytime soon...but the relationship will be different, no more blank checks to the US and the rest when it comes to our national security concerns. I also expect our journey to the EU that died around 2007 with Sarkozys arrogance and Merkels hositlity will finally,thank god, be declared dead so the dickheads in Brussels can stop talking down to us with regards to our internal affairs.

Also I expect a more independent foreign policy and more economic deals with Asian and southeast asian countries...our dependence on EU investment has to be slashed down, immediately

I think your nationalistic views (nothing wrong on being one) might cloud your judgement in the same way that some of the Western posters have their judgement clouded by the press when it comes to Turkey.

Look at it this way: EU is very close. EU is very big and, except China, the biggest economical power around the area. And you're already doing business for decades. The system is already in place and I don't see much changing despite what some politicians say. Now that comes with the perk that the EU has a say in your internal matters, but that's normal.

Of course, having more trade with Asia is always a good thing but I see it as a distant second to the trade with Europe for the future.

Regarding USA, well the last years were anything but a shining example of successful foreign policy on their part, but give them this: Erdogan managed to make their blunders look like professional decisions :)
 
Anyway, the better question is "Can Turkey afford being outside of NATO?" You're very short on friends as it is, and Russia is just around the corner.
Mate, don't mistake Turks with your people. We lived free on these lands without NATO for 950 years.

I think your nationalistic views (nothing wrong on being one) might cloud your judgement in the same way that some of the Western posters have their judgement clouded by the press when it comes to Turkey.
:lol:
https://defence.pk/threads/western-medias-coup-coverage-turned-into-anti-erdoğan-rhetoric-criticized.440393/

Well, i read your posts. You offered your opinion but didn't say the reason. :-)

It is always fun to see butthurts from our ex-vilayets.....so, know your place Eflak.
 
https://defence.pk/threads/western-medias-coup-coverage-turned-into-anti-erdoğan-rhetoric-criticized.440393/
Well, i read your posts. You offered your opinion but didn't say the reason. :-)

It is always fun to see butthurts from our ex-vilayets.....so, know your place Eflak.

That's a rather unfortunate way to hold a conversation.
Also, what's with that link? I didn't post there

It's the 21's century, you lost your empire some time ago and came very close to loosing everything.The vilayets, as you put it, beat you in the end an you got nothing worth while out of it. Wake up and leave behind the 15th century nationalism:)
 
That's a rather unfortunate way to hold a conversation.
Also, what's with that link? I didn't post there

It's the 21's century, you lost your empire some time ago and came very close to loosing everything.The vilayets, as you put it, beat you in the end an you got nothing worth while out of it. Wake up and leave behind the 15th century nationalism:)


Your attempt at a civilised discussion with these people is futile.Remember,they come from a country where people are lynched on the street in 2016.

Nu degeaba se spune :Ce nu intelegi,esti turc ? :-)

this is not your business. get lost!


Maybe,but it looks like it's Moody's business.:wave:
 
That's a rather unfortunate way to hold a conversation.
Also, what's with that link? I didn't post there
A thread that shows biased western media...

It's the 21's century, you lost your empire some time ago and came very close to loosing everything.The vilayets, as you put it, beat you in the end an you got nothing worth while out of it.
Empires born, evolve and die, there is no exception in the history...yet, i was not talking about that.

You implied things about Russia. My answer was a reply to your implication. We waged 17 wars against Russia and never lost our freedom...infact we never lost our freedom since 1000 years.

Wake up and leave behind the 15th century nationalism:)
Rise of nationalism begin in the 19th century both in Europe and Ottoman Empire. You might wanna read one or two things about the subject.

Also there is nothing wrong with the nationalism. We are proud of our history.

Your attempt at a civilised discussion with these people is futile.Remember,they come from a country where people are lynched on the street in 2016.
You refer to lynching on the bridge.

Watch it....soldiers opening fire on unarmed civilians whom holds nothing but Turkish flags in their hands. They even fired with tanks. Killed dozens of people, till their ammunition got depleted. People lost their brothers, friends, relatives.

Yeah, it was very ugly. But totally understandable.
 
Your attempt at a civilised discussion with these people is futile.Remember,they come from a country where people are lynched on the street in 2016.

Nu degeaba se spune :Ce nu intelegi,esti turc ? :-)

Maybe,but it looks like it's Moody's business.:wave:
Still on this thread? Dont you have tea planned with the Queen ??

Yenilen pehlivan güreşe doymazmış :rofl:

@Sinan
 
Still on this thread? Dont you have tea planned with the Queen ??

Yenilen pehlivan güreşe doymazmış :rofl:

@Sinan
This guy is a two-faced hypocrite.

He critisize and insults Turkey as we are getting rid of Gülenists....

Yet he urges France to do the same (not same, he is talking about cleansing Muslim community).
uselles dude...you're in a civil war

Your "own" are turning against you at every corner.You took to many in and you don't have the balls to do what needs to be done.

Their country, leaders, media, people....they are all the same stuff, hypocrites.
 

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom