John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Agree, the choice between Finland, Sweden, and Greece versus Turkey is a no brainer. I suspect over 50% of NATO’s current membership wouldn’t miss sultan Erdogan.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
Agree, the choice between Finland, Sweden, and Greece versus Turkey is a no brainer. I suspect over 50% of NATO’s current membership wouldn’t miss sultan Erdogan.
That may be so but it will only reinforce the Turkish narrative that certain European countries are not impartial when it comes to Turkey/Greece; are prejudiced towards Turkey and it does not change the fact that despite whatever flaws or downturns that Turkey is still a valued member of NATO.

We certainly live in interesting times...
We always have. We've also always lived in dangerous times.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
That may be so but it will only reinforce the Turkish narrative that certain European countries are not impartial when it comes to Turkey/Greece; are prejudiced towards Turkey and it does not change the fact that despite whatever flaws or downturns that Turkey is still a valued member of NATO.



We always have. We've also always lived in dangerous times.
Turkey was and could still be a valued member but not with Erdogan or anyone like him!
 

swerve

Super Moderator
That may be so but it will only reinforce the Turkish narrative that certain European countries are not impartial when it comes to Turkey/Greece; are prejudiced towards Turkey
Do you mean prejudiced against Turkey? "Towards" is ambiguous. It could mean for or against.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
Turkey was and could still be a valued member but not with Erdogan or anyone like him!
Turkey is a NATO member maintaining its commitments and one occupying an extremely strategic location. It's still valued irrespective of whether one likes Erdogan or not or whatever issues Greece has with Turkey.

If Turkey has ceased becoming a valued NATO member and is a liability on the basis that non democratic Erdogan is in power; is not eager to ingratiate himself with other NATO countries and has adopted policies harmful to NATO then NATO should stop wasting time and expel Turkey - period/full stop.

Do you mean prejudiced against Turkey? "Towards" is ambiguous. It could mean for or against.
I did; should have typed against rather than towards. Thank you.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Agree, the choice between Finland, Sweden, and Greece versus Turkey is a no brainer. I suspect over 50% of NATO’s current membership wouldn’t miss sultan Erdogan.
Are you sure about this? Note the role Turkish Bayraktars have played in the current fight. What would happen if Erdogan actually threw his lot in with Putin? Even just in this Ukrainian war. Remember, whether Finland and Sweden are officially part of NATO or not, they are definitely part of the collective west and in any serious confrontation throw their lot in with NATO. Erdogan's Turkey on the other hand could conceivably not. It might be more important to hold on to the formal treaty for the value it holds for Turkey, to make sure Erdogan is on the right side.
 

relic88

New Member
First post here, long time lurker. By no means am I qualified to comment on anything, just an Army Brat from the late 70's and 80s. I looked it up in passing but not too deep - a question for the respected members here, what is the actual process for NATO membership and can Erdogan actually prevent Finland and Swedish membership?

This article refers to an invitation process as opposed to an application process (maybe it is the same, not sure)

Enlargement and Article 10
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
First post here, long time lurker. By no means am I qualified to comment on anything, just an Army Brat from the late 70's and 80s. I looked it up in passing but not too deep - a question for the respected members here, what is the actual process for NATO membership and can Erdogan actually prevent Finland and Swedish membership?

This article refers to an invitation process as opposed to an application process (maybe it is the same, not sure)

Enlargement and Article 10
He can unfortunately. All candidate members must have the unanimous approval of all existing members before they become members.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
During a joint press conference with the Finnish PM; the Finnish President said he was a bit confused over reports of Turkish objections as he had a prior discussion with Erdogan who did not express any objection to Finland joining NATO.

As it stands; despite what ever concerns it has expressed; Turkey is unlikely to object to Finland and Sweden joining [the pressure on it would be to great] but it will insist that both countries take certain steps with regards to the presence of terrorist organisations on their soil.
 

Rob c

Well-Known Member
During a joint press conference with the Finnish PM; the Finnish President said he was a bit confused over reports of Turkish objections as he had a prior discussion with Erdogan who did not express any objection to Finland joining NATO.

As it stands; despite what ever concerns it has expressed; Turkey is unlikely to object to Finland and Sweden joining [the pressure on it would be to great] but it will insist that both countries take certain steps with regards to the presence of terrorist organisations on their soil.
This may be just the public part of Turkey looking to getting some back room sweetener. What is said in public is often not as important as what is negotiated behind closed doors, time will tell in the end. But I would not be surprised if we never hear some of the details of what Turkey is realy after
 

Rob c

Well-Known Member
During a joint press conference with the Finnish PM; the Finnish President said he was a bit confused over reports of Turkish objections as he had a prior discussion with Erdogan who did not express any objection to Finland joining NATO.

As it stands; despite what ever concerns it has expressed; Turkey is unlikely to object to Finland and Sweden joining [the pressure on it would be to great] but it will insist that both countries take certain steps with regards to the presence of terrorist organisations on their soil.
This may be just the public part of Turkey looking to getting some back room sweetener. What is said in public is often not as important as what is negotiated behind closed doors, time will tell in the end. But I would not be surprised if we never hear some of the details of what Turkey is really after.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
This is a Kiwi Newsroom article that puts the Finnish and Swedish NATO membership application into context and shows just how much it has changed the European political landscape. The European left, was allergic to defence and security. It especially viewed the likes of Reagan, Bush Jnr, Trump, and Thatcher with much suspicion and some derision. The Greens, especially, were anti militaristic and were pacifists.

In 2014 Putin invades the eastern part of Ukraine using little green men and annexes Crimea. He then starts a covert war against Ukraine and from December last year ups the ante considerably, finally fully invading in February this year. In the last year or so the European left have gradually changed their stance, but since Putin's invasion this year they have done a complete 180 and now are more "aggressive" and assertive than most parties on the right. Even the German Greens seem to have cast their pacifism aside, with the German Greens being the most in favour of NATO and defence spending now. Both the Finnish PM, Sanna Marin, and Swedish PM, Magdalena Andersson, are left wing Social Democrats who would never have dreamed that they would lead their countries into NATO, yet here they are.

This is quite an interesting and intriguing development because its now taking defence out of the realm of the economical theory motivated politicians and placing it in political theory motivated politicians.

Putin’s War Has Changed The Pacifist Reflexes of Europe's Left | Newsroom
 
Top