Jordan's King Abdullah's Thought About Middle East NATO

The Idea of ​​Establishing the Middle East Command after World War II

Turkey joined NATO on February 18, 1952, along with Greece. Thus, the number of NATO member states increased to 14 at that time.

At first, England was among the countries that did not show a positive approach to Turkey's entry into NATO. The reason for this is England's World War II. After World War II, he wanted to establish his own spheres of influence in the Middle East again. England; He combined Turkey's security concerns with his Suez interests and wanted to establish a Middle East Defense System in which Turkey would also participate.

According to England; Whoever held the Middle East would have access to all three continents. Having influence in this region would ensure the establishment of a free world order. If the Middle East came under Soviet control, the free world would be a very small part. Based on these considerations, the UK found it more appropriate in terms of its own interests and expectations to keep its Middle East policy outside the borders of NATO and therefore not to support Turkey in the membership process. In addition, England wanted to establish an organization covering the entire region that Turkey wanted to be included in. In any case, British and US policies towards the Middle East began to coincide.

Britain tried to dictate an inner defense-inner ring approach that would be shaped around the inner ring based on the defense of the Suez Canal. The Americans, on the other hand, made an effort to form the outer ring that would include Turkey, Iraq and Iran around the Middle East, with the effect of the discussions on the containment policy of Soviet Russia, and to form an outer defense-outer ring in this framework. .

The policy of containing the Russians came to be seen as an almost impossible task if Turkey was not included in the ring. Britain prioritized taking Turkey with it in order to prevent the Arab states from being cold towards it and to accept the pact for the defense of the Middle East to be formed. Evaluating that a Turkey that would gain NATO membership could not unconditionally support the British Middle East policy, Britain did not favor Turkey's NATO membership due to its own foreign policy expectations and regional interests.

Attitudes of Turkey and the USA towards the Establishment of the Middle East Command

Turkey, on the other hand, gave importance to two principles in the process of obtaining NATO membership. The first was to meet the technical military needs for membership. Secondly, in NATO, decisions should not be made in accordance with the general interest of the alliance, and the decisions that will serve to meet the individual interests of any country (the British Middle East Policy was meant) should not be the subject of the alliance.

In this respect, the United States began to adopt an attitude that understood Turkey's sensitivities. Over time, American policy preferred to keep and evaluate Turkey's NATO membership process and the Middle East Command negotiations on separate lanes. However, Britain continued to stipulate that in a possible war, in return for the realization of Turkey's membership, Turkish soldiers should be placed under the command of the Middle East Command, which would be formed under the leadership of the British. The British proposal was not supported by the United States, as it concerned the Middle East region, where the United States could not determine its exact policy. Thereupon, it was immediately rejected by the Arab countries and Turkey. As a result, at the signing stage of the membership protocol, England could not bring these issues to the agenda again, and on October 17, 1951, the membership protocol was completed with the last signing of Denmark.

Jordan's King Abdullah's Desire for the Formation of the Middle East NATO:

Returning to the present day, King of Jordan II. Abdullah said he supports the idea of ​​a Middle East military alliance built on the same lines as NATO. As the head of the Jordanian Royal Family, which has close relations with the British, it is significant that King Abdullah stepped forward to revive the British idea of ​​establishing a traditional Mediterranean Command. In this period when the developments, tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean, and the use of the hydro-carbon deposits in this region and the alternatives of the access route have begun to occupy the international agenda, King Abdullah will probably not be the patron of British policies without obtaining permission from the British.

King Abdullah, who named the grouping he proposed as "Middle East NATO"; He stated that the mission of such an organization should be well defined, that the mission statement should be clear from the beginning, that the countries in the region should be included in this formation as much as possible, that he would be one of the first people in the Middle East to approve NATO. He claimed that his country knew about NATO operations, that he saw Jordan as a partner of NATO, that this formation could help in solving the changing balances and problems (increase in energy and commodity prices, etc.) after Russia's attack on Ukraine.

Conclusion:

It is understood that 70 years later, England preferred to express its old thoughts on the Eastern Mediterranean through proxy diplomacy through Jordan's King Abdullah in order to bring it back to the agenda today. It is observed that the UK, which left the European Union, has increased its warm contacts with the Middle East countries, especially with Turkey. British foreign policy, which is one step ahead of EU foreign policy in this respect, is preparing to make an effort to increase its strategic autonomy and historical military presence (Cyprus, Malta and Gibraltar) in the Mediterranean. England's steps in the Mediterranean seem worth watching more closely.