Dangerously Neutral

By Manolis Skoulikas

During the First World War, the Ottoman Empire, already in the apogee of its decline, played for the umpteenth time the “card” of the Great Power and sided with the Central Powers, hoping to emerge from its decline through a military victory. But it paid dearly for this with its crushing defeat and its dismemberment. The newly established Turkish state had just stepped on its bloody feet when the Second World War broke out. It had neither the strength nor the will to participate in a new deadly and precarious military confrontation of the powerful. Taking advantage of the overexpansion of the two adversaries of WWII, Turkey managed to fend off pressure from both sides to participate in the war, remaining an “Evasive Neutral” until the last day of the war.

Today, on the verge of the Third World War, it has again adopted the position of the Great Power but is also trying to maintain its ambiguous stance, this time navigating both sides’ approaches with bravado. So far, this tactic has put it in a difficult position as the downing of a Russian aircraft in Syria trapped it in a leonine deal with Russia, in which it was forced to buy the S-400 and install a Russian observation base in Akkuyu, where Russia will build a nuclear plant on terms of almost exclusive exploitation. This definite distancing from the American bloc deprived it of its warplane replacement parts, already grounding more than 30% of its air force, and eliminating it from the F-35 program, costing it all the advance it had deposited and rendering the Anadolu carrier merely a dismal drone platform. As an intermediary in the indirect sales of Iranian and Russian oil, it has been sanctioned, and in fact, Erdogan himself and his family are involved in these banking scandals, making him personally susceptible to pressure from the US. Its support for the Muslim Brotherhood has radically distanced it from all secular regimes in the Middle East, while anti-Zionist threats have directed Israeli policy to prepare for a military confrontation with Turkey. So, while no one in the Middle East is willing to tolerate a barbaric Ottoman domination again, Turkey, along with Qatar, are “spoiler states” in the wider region, thus further maximizing the disdain that both Middle-Easterners and Westerners have towards them collectively.

In fact, after the war events in Ukraine and the Middle East, the “Silk Road” remains closed for the near future with no auspicious prospects for its restart. Only two “passages” are left to China for the distribution of its products in Europe and Africa. The northern passage to the Arctic is predicted to close soon, as Trump covets Greenland, while already controlling Iceland and Northern Scandinavia. The only route left is through the Turkish former Soviet Republics and the Caspian Sea to Turkey and then to Europe and Africa. China has already given out tens of billions of dollars’ worth of loans to Turkey for this very purpose. The debt trap set by the “Red Dragon” has already deeply implicated Turkey, who not only risks new sanctions by acting the intermediary for the import of Chinese products into Europe through its customs union with the EU, but has invested in a number of states that can exert influence on IMEC (India-Middle East-Europe-Corridor), the competitive trade route of the Silk Road (BRI-one Belt-one Road-Initiative).

Turkey has bases in Somalia, flirts with the Canary Islands in the Indian Ocean, and threatens Sisi’s Egyptian secular regime through the Muslim Brotherhood. Its strategic positioning foreshadows its intention to become a regulator state in the IMEC corridor, allowing or prohibiting the passage of goods according to its interests and those of the states that will influence it – always for the right price. Accordingly, the US has entrusted the position of IMEC’s security guardian to Israel, so, from the outset, Turkey’s position is potentially in direct confrontation with this powerful US ally in the region.

After all, the need for Europe’s energy independence from Russia and the increasing energy needs in the race for Advanced Artificial Intelligence, make mining in the Eastern Mediterranean a stake of strategic importance for the West. Turkey is involved in the process by demanding, against International Law, a part of the Greek Cypriot EEZ, delaying mining and making it dangerous in light of the bombing of floating mining platforms, in case its predatory demands are not met. But if the Turkish demands are accepted, under pressure from America, the West will have to deal with a troublemaker state that will blackmail, for its own benefit, but also for the sake of its Eurasian partners, the West as a whole for the extraction and transit of hydrocarbons in the region. Its access to a large energy pool will also pave the way for it to enter the arena of the world’s powerful economies, making it a potential competitor to the West.

Turkey’s involvement in Syria, Libya and Somalia, as well as its intention to get involved in the Palestinian issue, indicate, in conjunction with the parallel instrumentalization of terrorist groups in the region, its intention to be a powerful regulatory factor in the geostrategic developments of the Middle East – and in fact particularly bothersome for Western interests. Israel is called upon to limit Turkish influence and Greece is called upon to assist it. The nationally bankrupt Greek political establishment categorically refuses to take on this role and this is a problem for American foreign policy. The U.S. cannot trust Turkey with the role of locum tenens of the region, despite the embraces of the two equally authoritarian presidents, and this was evident from Trump’s eventual retreat from supporting the Turkish presence in the peacekeeping force in Gaza, following intense pressure from the U.S. Jewish lobby and his possible involvement in the “Epstein Files.”

Despite the admiration that the US president has for Turkey’s “strongman”, US foreign policy cannot be based on an ambiguous blackmailer who is heavily leveraged by the Eurasian bloc. But if the Greek politicians do not rise to the occasion and seek only “calm waters” with Turkey, even by selling out Greece’s national sovereignty in the Eastern Mediterranean, the Americans may push for the imposition of Greek power in the region. Israel is poised for a long-term strategic dominance over Turkey, the State Department is divided, and Trump is treating the situation in the Middle East as a makeshift patch, in a recital of “business-like” shortsightedness. The US is in the dilemma of supporting a completely untrustworthy “spoiler state” strongly influenced by China and Russia, or of starting to whip a “lame horse”, the Greek government, which, like systemic descendants of the kodjabashis, voluntarily succumb to anyone who intimidates them so that they can end their four-year term in “calm waters”.

They, as the 2020 crisis showed, will only give permission to the army to defend national sovereignty if their own power is in danger of being overthrown. Given the servility of the Greek leaders, they will probably succumb to American pressures and no matter how much they try to placate their Turkish overlord, they will eventually be forced, as in 1821, to defend Greek national interests, even against their wishes.

Turkey presents itself as a Great Power, but its historical past has shown for centuries that this is nothing more than a superficial babble to hide its weakness from enemies it is terrified they will understand its vulnerability and will crush it into small parts. But it is now obvious that it cannot put “meat” in the game and the Turkish dolma is revealed once again to be merely…vegeterian.

If the mullahs’ regime falls under U.S.-Israeli bombing and special operations, China will lose its most important proxy in the region and turn to the next candidate: Turkey. Initially, Turkey may assume a simply increased role in the region, in terms of the Eurasian bloc and Islamic fundamentalism, but soon China will demand results and Turkey will not be able to resist it. It may present itself as a Great and Powerful Turkey, but it is nowhere near strong enough to maintain its neutrality by opposing the ever-increasing pressure from the two bitter adversaries in the great conflict of our time. The tighter the noose gets, the greater the pressure on the choice of camp will become and its promotion as a “player” in the area will lead to its final crushing by the rejected suitor of the much vaunted but also defenseless bride, if the military situation allows it. Circumstances may indeed not provide the opportunity for Turkey to be crushed by the side it did not choose, but if it does not choose either, then both opponents will turn against it, as in disputes of such magnitude and such significant stakes, anyone who does not side with one side is considered the enemy of both.

If in World War II Turkey’s very capable diplomacy and its remote position from the war fronts allowed it to remain evasively neutral, the clearly leading position it has assumed in the disputed region places it on a trajectory that will make it “dangerously” neutral.