Turkiye's Opportunities in NATO Fortification from North to South and Cyprus

It was announced by NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg that Turkiye, the only member of NATO  who objected to the NATO membership process of Finland and Sweden, would approve the memberships of both states as a result of the quadruple meeting held in Madrid. Stoltenberg said that, "Sweden and Finland agreed with Turkiye to join NATO."

As you may recall that , in my article which was titled as "Membership veto to Sweden and Finland", which I wrote on May 20, 2022, I stated that "Turkey's objections will continue for a certain period of time, but eventually, Turkey will lift its veto to these two countries and give approval." 

That's what happened.

Compromise is essential in the decision-making process in NATO, so being a member of NATO also means obtaining the right of veto. For a country to join NATO, the approval of all 30 current member states is required. Turkey used this trump card and put forward the justified conditions for Sweden and Finland's admission to membership.

According to the "Triple Memorandum" signed between Turkey, Sweden and Finland, Turkey's security concerns seem to have been taken into account. Regarding the PKK, it was stated in the text as follows;

“Finland and Sweden confirm that the PKK is a banned terrorist organization. Finland and Sweden undertake to prevent the activities of the PKK and all other terrorist organizations, their extensions, and the activities of persons involved in these organizations and/or their affiliated ones.”

In regard to PYD/YPG and FETO, the memorandum expressed the following;

“As future NATO Allies, Finland and Sweden fully support Turkiye against all threats to its national security. In this framework, Finland and Sweden will not support the PYD/YPG and the organization defined as FETO in Turkey.” 

Whether or not these commitments will be fulfilled, Turkiye will, of course, monitor the process in the upcoming period.

But if these commitments are not fulfilled, and if both states give up on these commitments after the end of the process of joining NATO, what will happen? Is there a time limit for the fulfillment of these commitments?

Turkiye should give approval based on actions, not commitments. After all, it should not be forgotten that EU and NATO member states have not fulfilled their other commitments in the past.

In fact, the issue of ending the support of not only Sweden and Finland, but also other NATO member countries, to all anti-Turkey formations, should definitely be brought to the agenda. Yes, those who try to enter the alliance undertake some issues, on the other hand, it must be emphasized that it is unacceptable for some states in the alliance to continue supporting terrorism and its extensions.

While NATO's central defense zone is fortified through the Ukraine war, the policy of consolidating the northern flank with two new members and encircling Russia continue. Another region that needs to be fortified and surrounded is the southeast wing of NATO, where the debate is about making the Greek Cypriot Administration a member of NATO, as if it were the entire representative of Cyprus.

Turkey should act very carefully and sensitively on this issue, as well. Increasing security concerns in the world can also provide a solution to the Cyprus problem. Turkey, and only if two equal and sovereign states are accepted in Cyprus, should give the permission. If both states both recognize each other and are recognized by the world in this way, then Turkiye shuold accept that both countries become 33rd and 34th NATO members with the name of Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot Republics. In addition, the commitment of Turkey and the Turkish Republic of Cyprus to become EU members must be taken into account against possible vetoes.

In short; It should be declared that the security of the Eastern Mediterranean, the strengthening of the southeast flank of NATO and the completion of the encirclement of Russia from the south cannot be realized without the approval of Turkiye.