Russo-Turkish Relations: The ‘Indivisible Security’ Principle Is No Longer Binding

I recall vividly the latest NATO Summit that took place in Vilnius and was given a lot of coverage on the Russian TV. As a result of digesting daily news I can instantly visualise a huge gathering of Western politicians, military officials and diplomats.

Within that sizable assemblage one could easily spot nearly ceaselessly gloomily walking president Erdogan. He was nonstop followed by his wife as usual wearing a head scarf. The only other less conspicuous person but overwhelmed to a greater extent by gloom as well as isolation was Mr. Zelensky. All this because he wasn’t getting his NATO membership not even in foreseeable future. In fact, he turned impudent and unjustifiably so, towards the British defence minister Mr. Ben Wallace who already gave him a short shrift by stating that “Ukraine had a habit of treating allies, including the UK, as if they were an Amazon warehouse with lists of demands for weapons.”

But what was president Erdogan up to? It is worth noting, that yet prior to the NATO Vilnius summit, Erdogan told bluntly a joint press conference with the Ukrainian president in Istanbul: “There is no doubt that Ukraine deserves membership of NATO.”

At the Vilnius summit Erdogan’s activities and talks essentially reflected security and economic affairs. Not only he envisaged a purchase of U.S. F16 lots but also spoke about being accepted after fifty long years to be a member of the European Union in exchange for his approval of Sweden as a member in NATO. All this, even though some Swedes were demonstratively burning copies of the Holy Quran.

The NATO and EU officials made strenuous efforts to explain to Mr. Erdogan that to qualify for NATO and to qualify for EU are two quite different things and it is not a matter of applying any exchange mechanism: you allow me to join EU and I will allow Sweden to join NATO. Strictly speaking, the NATO spokesperson declared:

NATO and EU enlargement were ‘separate processes.’ The accession process for each candidate country is based on the merits of each country. The two processes cannot be linked.

This must have been the case of what some experts on Turkey call “transactional relationship” or “eastern bazaar mentality.”

Importantly, what was absent in Erdogan’s support for Ukraine to join NATO and granting NATO membership to Sweden was how it would affect security of other countries such as Russia. Why did he disregard Putin’s sine qua non principle of “indivisible security”? The principle was first used in the 1975 Helsinki Act, but also appeared in the 1990 Charter for a New Europe and in the 1997 Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security. It will be essential to note that all those treaties were signed by the west and the Russian Federation. It appears that such principle does not mean much not only for Turkey but also all the remaining NATO countries.

What would be a Western response to such a commentary? In all probability, the west would make reference to two (OSCE) documents that promote its version of indivisible security: the European Security Charter, signed in Istanbul in November 1999, and the Astana Declaration of December 2010. The US is a signatory to both documents. The Istanbul charter says countries should be free to choose their own security arrangements and alliances, but… it adds – something that they deliberately omit in their present declarations – that while choosing their security arrangements countries “will not strengthen their security at the expense of the security of other states.” Would Mr. Erdogan and his NATO colleagues claim that Ukrainian and Swedish membership of the NATO bloc is not at the expense of the security of Russia? If so, will anybody in his/her right senses accept their claim, to put it mildly, as credible?

Turkish participation in the NATO enlargement isn’t a single hostile act displayed towards the Russian Federation in recent times. For instance, since August 2022 Turkey has been proceeding with the construction of unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) Bayraktar TB2 drones plant in Ukraine that will be used against Russian troops involved in the Special Military Operation. In addition, Baykar company had already sold some of them to Ukraine but also promised that it would establish joint training and maintenance centres for Turkish UCAVs in Ukraine.

In another instance, just recently, violating the agreement with Russia, Turkey freed Azovstal commanders allowing them to return to Ukraine with Zelensky to bolster his declining popularity. According to the original agreement they were supposed to be released after the end of the military conflict in Ukraine. As if it wasn’t enough, Erdogan made a deliberate faux pas by neither consulting nor notifying Russia about his treacherous decision.

Russia and Turkey Relations: A brief military overview

Despite the 2017 S-400 mobile surface-to-air missile system sale to Turkey by Russia that caused a great furore in the west and prompted the then president Trump to sanction Turkey, one could enumerate quite a number of international moves where both countries (Russia and Turkey) represent opposing interests, sides and undertakings. To begin with, in 2015 Turkey shot down a Russian fighter plane on its way to Syria. It led to a temporary diplomatic freeze. In Syria, Turkey and Russia back opposing sides, be it covertly, deploying foreign mercenaries, be it openly, deploying troops and military equipment. Libya is another case of that type.

However, it is the 2020 conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan that should be highlighted in some detail. After all, it may have become not just a proxy war between Turkey’s and Russia’s respective backers, but possibly a direct military clash between them. In this context it should be reminded that Turkey denies Armenian claims that up to 1.5 million people were killed during the WWI and that it constituted an act of genocide. President Erdogan offered condolences to Armenian victims’ descendants and calls their genocide “mass killings” while Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu called the 1915-16 events a “mistake.” Russia is among the number of countries sticking to the term genocide.

It is worth noting that even though Azerbaijan, Turkey’s close ally, promises – under Russian pressure – to come to terms with the Armenian side with respect to Nagorno-Karabakh, it makes from time to time some officially sanctioned genocidal threats towards Armenia and Armenians. How one may not be shocked by the 2005 statement by Baku Mayor Hajibala Abutalybov who told the visiting German delegation:

Our goal is the complete elimination of Armenians. You, Nazis, already eliminated the Jews in the 1930s and 1940s, right? You should be able to understand us.

or a 15 years later a statement by Qarabag FK Soccer Club’s Nuran Ibrahimov who wrote:

We must kill all Armenians – children, women and the elderly. We need to kill them without making a distinction. No regrets. No compassion.

Hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan may take on a new dimension in the light of a new agreement between Israel and Azerbaijan. Most briefly, the latter country obtained $5 billion-worth of Israeli weapons and explosives in exchange,

for Azerbaijani energy and access to Azerbaijan’s airfields if Israel chooses to strike militarily at Iran’s nuclear program locations. It should be noted that Israeli drones were instrumental to Azerbaijan’s victory in the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War.

Such a clandestine pact has an enormous potential to embroil the whole region in a war with possibly catastrophic consequences not only for Iran, Azerbaijan’s close ally Turkey, as well as possibly for Armenia. In case of an encroachment onto Armenian territory the conflict would not leave unscathed the Russian Federation which has a defence agreement with Armenia.

Turkey appears the only connection of Russia to the West

We all remember how Russian foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov was prevented from flying to Serbia in June 2022. All told, Lavrov was due to meet his counterpart Nikola Selakovic and Serbian Orthodox Church Patriarch Porfirije but such NATO members as Montenegro, North Macedonia and Bulgaria closed their airspace to his plane. Lavrov blamed NATO for devising the flight ban.

Perhaps, nothing better explains the prevailing geopolitical situation in the region than Lavrov’s own online comments after attempted, unsuccessful flight to Serbia:

“An unthinkable thing has happened, a sovereign state has been deprived of its right to conduct foreign policies. The international activities of Serbia on the Russian track have been blocked. From the Western viewpoint, Serbia mustn’t have any choice, any freedom in choosing its partners. The West clearly shows that it would use any base means to apply pressure.”

In contrast to that, contradicting western sanctions, not only Lavrov but millions of Russian citizens are allowed to travel to Turkey. According to official data last year, 5.2 million Russian tourists visited Turkey. Turkish authorities expect about 6 mln tourists from Russia to visit the country by the end of 2023. With the Turkish economy being in poor shape it is a big boost in terms of the balance of payments and easing unemployment. That arrangement is beneficial to both sides: Turkey is obtaining economic benefits and Russian tourists gain leisure at the sunny Mediterranean coast. Even if the conflict in Ukraine comes to an end soon that pattern of exchange is unlikely to be undermined.

President Erdogan regardless of whether the west picks on tourism, the grain deal, the Akkuyu power station or Turkey becoming a gas hub is firm and knows what to say when they accuse him of disregarding western sanctions. It could be claimed that his explanations are part of his permanent home-spun philosophy which are part of his cultural background. His arguments contain plain logic. Let us justify all in his own words: “The Turkish authorities will not be able to join the sanctions against Russia, as they cannot let their citizens freeze without Russian gas, if we take natural gas alone, about half of the natural gas we use comes from Russia. Besides that, we are building our Akkuyu nuclear power plant with Russia.”

It is certain that with huge and growing population (85 mln+) in line with Erdogan staunchly pro-Muslim policies Turkish dependence on Russian natural resources, food and technologies will only increase in the future. The Turkish political opposition, even if it comes to power in five years, is neither in a position nor has any intentions to introduce any major policy changes towards Russia. Turkish presidential candidate Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the main challenger to incumbent President Recep Erdogan, admitted in May 2023 that had he won the presidential election he would have not broken friendly relations with Russia.

There is one more reason why Russia’s relations with Turkey should be handled with utmost care. As Kerim Has, a Moscow-based freelance political analyst claims, “Turkey is de facto the only remaining connection of Russia to the West.” It is apparent that some Russian companies have restarted business with Europe via Turkey to bypass the sanctions. The Turkish business daily Dunya maintains that mechanism of “reexporting” has, in the past few months, turned Turkey into a busy transit hub for goods destined for Russia. The value of all goods transferred to Russia this way since March till August 2022 may have already reached around $4 billion.

No wonder, Turkish President Recep Erdogan and his counterpart, Vladimir Putin, met in August 2022 in Sochi. The two leaders held marathon talks behind closed-doors. There was no word on circumventing western sanctions. Yes, afterwards there were a few clever lines on strengthening mutually beneficial cooperation. President Erdogan was even bombastic when he said: “The world was watching the Sochi summit.” Surely, the west was watching it.

Check Also

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, November 18, 2024

Russian officials continued to use threatening rhetoric as part of efforts to deter the United …