Donald Trump is the best thing that could have happened to NATO. Without Donald Trump this military defence organisation was about to go into oblivion. What the Russian President did not manage, Donald Trump did: a resurrection of NATO. NATO has become a top priority again and even according to Mitch McConnell of the Republican Party (Politico).
Interestingly, this resurrection of NATO would not have happened if Hillary Clinton would have said the same. It might have been the final push to the death of NATO. So why do people react so different to Trump’s words? Possibly because of Trump’s friendship with – and admiration of – the Russian President (eg, CBS, CNN, MotherJones, Politico). The Turkish President would however have called Donald Trump a traitor and locked him up for treason.
Why don’t Americans call Trump a traitor? In general, because few Americans care about anything happening outside the USA. Trump knows that very well. Threatening not to help your allies over money issues could easily be viewed as treason, especially by fragile NATO allies like the Baltics. From an American perspective, it’s hard to call someone a traitor who has a habit of using lies and reverse psychology (see my 22 July blog). It’s like arresting a public fool for treason.
It’s quite possible – and perhaps even likely – that NATO will “soon” see a huge change. The recent comments on Turkey and Greece by the American Secretaries John Kerry (Foreign Affairs) and Jack Lew (Treasury) point in that direction (eg, FT, Independent). There is speculation that the Turkish President is opting out on NATO and looking for an Ankara-Moscow axis. Blaming the USA and Fethullah Gülen for the recent alleged Turkish military coup is only the beginning.
Given the long history of Russo-Turkish wars that step might well be a fatal mistake for Turkey. The recent cleansing of the Turkish army has undermined its military safety. Asking Moscow for military help against the many Turkish enemies could invoke a Crimea like scenario. Most likely, this would also end in a repeat of the humiliating 1988 Afghanistan scenario for Moscow.
An axis between Ankara and Moscow would be in the military interest of Moscow as Turkey controls access to the Bosporus and the Turkish Straits since the Montreux Convention of 1936. The Russian Black Sea Fleet would then become much more dangerous. Greece and its many islands near Turkey would become much more important to NATO after Turkey would leave NATO and join Moscow. It would also be the final push for the Turkish army for a new – successful – coup.
Possibly one Turkish party would profit from an Ankara-Moscow axis: the Kurds. The Kurds have often been used by Moscow in their geopolitical ploys (see my 6 August 2015 blog). Kurdistan may finally see light of day after an Russo-Turkish alliance. An independent Kurdistan would seriously undermine Turkish future regional or global ambitions which would be a long term benefit for Moscow.
Turkey leaving NATO is like the UK leaving the EU (Brexit). Both alliances are probably better off without these unreliable and unwilling partners. Turkey was an embarrassment to NATO since its 1974 attack on and occupation of Northern Cyprus. Turkey has been an embarrassment to the EU ever since its membership application in 1987. The U.K. has been a major obstacle for a European version of NATO. Germany and France can finally create a roadblock for Moscow.
These are truly exciting times.
Dire Straits – Brothers in Arms (1985) – artists, lyrics, video, Wiki-1, Wiki-2
0 Comments