"Excluding Türkiye would be a real disaster for NATO" Experts comment on Bolton's threats

Last week, former US Presidential National Security Adviser John Bolton lashed out at Recep Tayyip Erdogan in an article entitled "NATO’s Electoral Message for Erdogan" published in The Wall Street Journal.

The alliance should expel Türkiye from NATO if the Turkish president keeps his divisive performance, he said, stressing Türkiye is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, but it isn’t acting like an ally. It is therefore necessary to raise the issue of excluding Türkiye from NATO.

İs expelling Türkiye from NATO as Bolton talks about even possible? Is it in the interest of the West for one of the strongest armies on the planet to leave the Alliance? How can we characterise these statements by the American politician?

Well-known foreign experts have shared their assessment of these events with Caliber.Az.

Associate Professor at the Institute for Russian and Eurasian Studies (IRES) of Uppsala University, Sweden, Ph.D. Greg Simons noted that Bolton appears to him as a reckless warmonger who believes that the United States can dictate demands, as it did at the peak of its power.

"Bolton is arrogant and world events have passed him by, which makes him a danger to the US. Even Trump, with his shortcomings, could not tolerate Bolton's arrogance and reckless incompetence forever, eventually firing him. This publicity through symbolic demonstration seems like an attempt to get back into the system.

Bolton's public statements can be seen as an indirect attempt to threaten Türkiye and get it to obey. One reason for such a move is that the current NATO structure will not allow this threat to be carried out legally. However, the West and legitimacy are not a problem for the so-called 'right' order now. So this could be an attempt to scare Türkiye with a bluff. However, I don't see Erdogan and Türkiye bowing to this crude pressure tactic," says Simons.

If Bolton had somehow managed to pull off this supremely stupid act, it would have been a real disaster for NATO, he believes.

"Not only would the bloc lose a major army, it would also lose a country of the supreme strategic position in terms of current events in geopolitics. It would be a major own goal on a grand scale.

So even if Bolton is ranting and raving, perhaps those in power will realise the utter self-destructive stupidity of the idea. At any rate, this politician's statements should simply be ignored," says Simons.

According to Mehmet Perinçek, a Turkish political scientist, Ph.D. in history, and visiting researcher at the Institute of Asian and African Studies at Moscow State University, there is a serious strategic confrontation between Turkey and NATO at the moment.

"The alliance and its members support both in Iraq and Syria terrorist forces that threaten Türkiye's territorial integrity. They supply them with weapons and even consider the PKK and other terrorist organisations that are associated with it as their ground forces and strategic allies in our region. The confrontation between Türkiye and NATO can also be seen in the Eastern Mediterranean. The USA and other countries of the Alliance have created an anti-Turkish bloc, openly oppose Türkiye's interests and even conduct related military exercises. The tensions between Türkiye and Greece are also caused by this confrontation. Therefore, NATO is the main national threat to Türkiye," Perinçek believes.

In his view, the bloc's countries have an interest in weakening Türkiye's economy.

"NATO means dollar domination within our country and our region. And this domination destroys the influence and sovereignty of the Turkish lira within the country. This is also a great danger to the Turkish economy and of course for Türkiye's security.

On the other hand, the alliance orchestrated a military coup attempt using Gülenists and NATO generals in the Turkish army. Today, NATO countries have become nests for Gülenists and separatists, who are openly opposing Türkiye and even fighting against its army. Based on this, it can be said that NATO sees Türkiye as a strategic enemy. Even during their exercises, and meetings they use pictures of Ataturk and Erdogan as enemies of the alliance. There was such a scandal if anyone remembers. And it was not a mistake or a misunderstanding. It is a reality. The source of this problem is not Türkiye, but NATO's strategy," Perinçek believes.

Türkiye is a major obstacle to US and NATO plans due to its powerful army, a tradition of statehood, and rich natural resources, he says.

"On the other hand, Türkiye's geopolitical and geographical position is important to US and NATO plans, and without destroying Türkiye's statehood, they cannot implement their plans in our region. This is the reason for all the problems described. They are strategic. For NATO, Türkiye is not really an ally anymore.

Therefore, Türkiye's membership in the alliance cannot serve its national security interests. I think Türkiye should withdraw from NATO itself in order to ensure its territorial integrity, and energy security and to develop its economy. These goals can only be achieved in cooperation with other countries that are affected by NATO countries. So, it has to cooperate with neighboring states such as Syria, Iraq, Iran, Russia, China, Turkic states, and Pakistan. They should join their efforts to hinder the plans of the USA and NATO. NATO membership is no longer the solution to Türkiye's security problems. It needs to integrate into other, regional groupings to balance threats. Leaving NATO coincides with the sentiments and desires of the Turkish people. There are various polls showing that the Turkish people see the US as an enemy. And they see Eurasian countries as their main partners," the Turkish researcher concluded.