The Importance of Turkey's NATO Membership in the Shadow of Israel's Middle East Policies

Turkey's membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) since 1952 has brought many strategic advantages at both the regional and global levels. This structure, which has existed since the Cold War era, has played a central role in Turkey's defence and security strategies, while also strengthening its position in the international arena.

The most fundamental advantage of NATO membership is undoubtedly the collective defence guarantee. Article 5 of the NATO Treaty stipulates that an armed attack against one member country shall be considered an attack against all members, and that a collective response will be provided. This article provides a vital guarantee for Turkey's territorial integrity and sovereignty.

This deterrent factor is of great importance for Turkey, which borders geopolitically critical and unstable regions such as the Eastern Mediterranean, the Black Sea and the Middle East. Knowing that it has NATO's military and political support in the face of a possible external threat significantly increases Turkey's defence capabilities.

Although NATO has shown some hesitation in recent isolated incidents, this deterrence remains strong, especially against non-NATO member countries. Furthermore, when looking at NATO averages, the Turkish Armed Forces have become the second strongest operational force in NATO after the United States, particularly with their attacks over the last 10 years.

Separate from the military perspective but complementing it, NATO also provides an important diplomatic advantage on the political platform. Through this platform, Turkey has the opportunity to establish regular dialogue with its Western allies, find solutions to common security problems, and influence and direct international policies.

In this context, let us examine the current wars in the Middle East and their global impact before and after these wars.

The Middle East: The Focus of Global Conflicts

In the turbulent politics of the Middle East, Israel's belief that it has the right to freely use the airspace of neighbouring countries and carry out targeted operations in any country it wishes, as well as its military capability to do so, is one of the most striking indicators of the balance of power in the region. This is particularly evident in the case of Syria and Iraq, where Israel's ‘freedom’ in this regard is even more pronounced. This situation goes beyond a purely military issue and is a complex variable involving international law, regional sovereignty and geopolitical conflicts of interest.

From an international law perspective, the unauthorised use of another country's airspace and the conduct of military operations on its territory clearly constitute a violation of sovereignty. However, while Israel frequently carries out such operations, the responses from the international community are generally weak. The underlying reasons for this are multifaceted:

US Support: The full support of the United States, Israel's closest ally, reduces the pressure on Israel to be held accountable internationally. The US veto power in the United Nations Security Council prevents the adoption of resolutions against Israel.

Perceived Iranian Threat: Israel generally justifies its operations in Syria and Iraq on the grounds of curbing Iran's influence in the region and preventing arms transfers to proxy groups such as Hezbollah. This ‘Iranian threat’ argument is also accepted by some Western countries. In addition, operations carried out against Iran over the past few days have been justified on the grounds that Iran is in the process of producing nuclear weapons.

Syria is one of the countries most affected by Israeli air operations and airspace violations. The civil war that has been ongoing since 2011 has weakened Syria's air defence systems and made the country vulnerable to external intervention. Israel uses Syrian airspace to target Iranian military targets and facilities belonging to Iran-backed militias. It is trying to prevent arms shipments to Hezbollah. Sometimes it also carries out attacks directly on targets belonging to the Syrian army.

Despite these attacks repeatedly violating Syria's sovereignty, the responses from Syria's allies, such as Russia and Iran, have generally been limited to diplomatic statements. Despite Russia's efforts to modernise Syria's air defence systems, Israeli jets continue to carry out operations without encountering significant resistance.

Regional and Global Implications

It is now widely accepted by all world authorities that Israel's policy in the Middle East is not based on daily or short-term operations, but is part of a long-term plan. Furthermore, despite its significant financial and political power on a global scale, Israel's land area is smaller than that of Ankara. This poses a serious problem for Israel in terms of both its future and its defence. The fact that Israel must expand its territory in order to survive in the Middle East is also evident when looking at the country's recent history.

It is also clear that this expansion policy will not be an easy task, whether strategically, politically or militarily. In this context, the operations that have begun today should be seen as a step towards eliminating targets that are considered a threat to its existence, while also expanding its territory. Furthermore, these operations are part of a chain of global operations that were planned long ago, particularly in terms of politics and intelligence, and are interconnected on both the internal and external fronts.

It is also possible that Turkey is attempting to keep certain forces that could hinder its progress away from the region through strategic and manipulative means, as it is unlikely to be able to deter them with military force alone. For example, the political vacuum in Syria has led to the country becoming almost a free zone, and Russia, which had influence in Syria until a few years ago, has been forced to withdraw from the region in order to be able to move freely in the airspace. This, along with global intelligence directives and strategic moves, has led to escalating tensions between Ukraine and Russia. Although peace seems likely in the near term, the increase in Western-backed attacks from the Ukrainian front should not be viewed as a coincidence.

Similarly, Pakistan, which is likely to support Iran in the event of a major intervention in Iran and the ensuing conflicts that could last for the medium to long term, should also be seen as part of a chain of events that is strategically beneficial to Israel, despite the geographical distance between Pakistan and India.

In light of all these developments, Turkey, as a country where the fire is approaching its southern borders, has taken and will continue to take steps to secure itself. Despite serious commercial relations between Turkey and Israel, it cannot be said that there are very warm feelings between the two peoples. Furthermore, the presence of small proxy groups along the Syrian and Iraqi borders, which have the potential to do anything when armed or financially supported, and the political vacuum in neighbouring countries are clear and natural reasons for Turkey to build up its defences, particularly along its borders with Syria, Iraq and Iran.

The measures taken/being taken by the Turkish Armed Forces in terms of deploying air defence, intelligence and strike forces in accordance with the threat and raising the level of combat readiness to the highest level are attracting the attention of countries in the region. It is precisely here that powers that may see Turkey's power and military-strategic moves in the region as an obstacle to their own future plans may seek to draw Turkey into different fronts, just as they are keeping Russia and Pakistan busy on other fronts. In this case, the importance of NATO membership is very clear and stands before us as a powerful reality.

In the past, some tensions with Greece, the Kardak crisis, and even the deliberate downing of one of our F-16 aircraft in the Aegean Sea have caused serious tensions, but these have never escalated into war between the two countries. The main reason for this is that both countries are members of NATO and have demonstrated their commitment to the consultation and communication provided by the NATO platform and to complying with general NATO policy.

At a time when these events are unfolding in the Middle East, it would be in Turkey's best interests to act with great caution and prudence in its political and military relations with neighbouring countries. An Arab proverb says: ‘I fight against my brother and my cousin against the enemy. When we defeat the enemy, I fight against my brother and my cousin. When we defeat my cousin, I fight against my brother.’ Based on this, when viewed realistically in the light of history, it is clear that wars in this region will unfortunately never end. They have not ended until today, and they will not end from now on.

In conclusion, I consider it important for Turkey to have an advanced, independent and sustainable sector, especially in the fields of domestically produced air defence systems, early warning aircraft, BVR air-to-air missiles, guided air-to-ground munitions, armed and unarmed unmanned aerial vehicles, and especially electronic warfare. In this context, it is of vital importance for Turkey to remain within global structures such as NATO, of which it has been a member for 73 years, to remain vigilant against political or social provocations on these issues, and to maintain good relations with its neighbours without making concessions.