The talks between Russia, the United States and NATO this week and the developments in Kazakhstan have revealed how important the geopolitics of Central Asia and Eurasia will be in the new era. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, during his statements after the NATO-Russia Council meetings the previous day, stated that there is a real risk for an armed conflict in Europe. This assessment indicates that all parties with influence in this region against a possible armed confrontation will take one side or another or be forced to take a position.
Stoltenberg also stressed that if Russia does not compromise and attempts a new invasion, it will pay for it, while NATO will not compromise the security of its allies and the rights of sovereignty and territorial integrity of each country.
Although the secretary-general has cited Russia as the culprit of the current crisis over Ukraine and said that NATO's expansion is not intended to threaten Russia, Moscow does not seem to be satisfied with these statements about NATO's expansion into the East.
In the immediate shadow of these tensions, developments in Kazakhstan have shown that Russia has somehow arbitrated the population area in Central Asia over the complex situation in this country. Considering the fact that the countries of the former Soviet Union, such as Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova want to strengthen their engagement with the West, recent fortification in Kazakhstan also can be interpreted as Moscow's response to this snarled up NATO-Russia conflict.
Last month, Moscow submitted draft security documents demanding that NATO deny membership to Ukraine and other former Soviet countries and roll back the alliance's military deployments in Central and Eastern Europe. Washington and its allies have refused to provide such pledges but said they are ready for the talks.
Meanwhile, the demands, contained in a proposed Russia-U.S. security treaty and a security agreement between Moscow and NATO, were drafted amid soaring tensions over a Russian troop buildup near Ukraine that has stoked fears of a possible invasion. Russia has denied it has plans to attack its neighbor but pressed for legal guarantees that would rule out NATO expansion and weapons deployment there.
Now, in the light of all these developments, Moscow has perhaps the most certain position with its 100,000 soldiers who have piled up their conventional power in Ukraine.
At this point, it is a matter of wonder how NATO and its allies, and especially the United States, will take a position in this conjuncture, and whether it will be as clear as Russia.
In fact, Washington does not prefer to use deterrence instruments militarily by itself, unlike Russia, but it seems that it will do so mostly through NATO under the umbrella of the alliance. In addition to that, another strategy of Washington in this regard is to revive its traditional allies, whose problems with Russia are kept in the refrigerator from time to time.
In this sense, it exposed an important decision by Washington, which was reflected in the media this week. According to Greek media reports citing government sources, the U.S. has conveyed its reservations about the Eastern Mediterranean Gas Pipeline to Greece, Israel and the Greek Administration of Southern Cyprus in an informal letter. Among the reservations expressed by Washington, the project was shown to be economically unsustainable and far from environmental decisiveness.
In short, this development seems to have upset Greece, which has recently seen the U.S. increase its fortifications, especially against Russia. We will see if Washington will send a positive message to Ankara with the steps it will take in other headlines concerning the two in the coming days.
After all, at this very moment, the position that Turkey will take in the confrontation between Russia, the NATO alliance and the United States is more vital than ever.
As a proven and indispensable member of NATO, Turkey is an important strategic partner for both sides. However, this does not negate the fact that both sides have taken steps and approaches that are sometimes distrustful of Turkey's national security interests.
This issue is especially seen in the inability of NATO, the United States and Russia to develop policy instruments that take into account Turkey's national security concerns against the PKK and its Syrian branch YPG.
Despite the fact that the PKK/YPG's terrorism threatens not only Turkey, but the entire region, especially Syria and Iraq, Russia and the United States have developed positional and tactical alliances with this organization to date.
On the other hand, Ankara's complaints include the establishment of other alliances within NATO aimed at the members themselves, especially after Greece's provocative and hostile policies aimed at Turkey following the increased military fortifications of the United States in the country in recent years.
In particular, the latest statements of the Minister of Defense Hulusi Akar also shed light on the issue. Greece has undermined NATO by attempting to form alliances against Turkey within the bloc, the minister said to journalists on Saturday.
Emphasizing that Greece is also an ally of Turkey in NATO, Akar noted that Greece is illegally arming demilitarized islands and is buying more weapons than it needs. "The formation of other alliances within NATO weakens NATO," he said. "This would actually be a threat to NATO."
Another critical point highlighted by the defense minister gives an idea of whether the alliance within NATO is consistent.
Commenting on the NATO alliance, Akar lamented what he said was an “open or covert” arms embargo by some allies on Turkey. He said those countries were “weakening” the alliance by not selling defense components to Turkey. Akar also stated that Turkey has completely fulfilled all the missions undertaken within the framework of NATO.
Considering all these facts, it will be much clearer where Turkey stands and will stand between the West and Russia.
It is a fact that Ankara does not have to take a side between two, as a loyal NATO member and a sovereign and independent country that can manage to maintain its relations in its national interests despite various issues of disagreement with Russia and the U.S.
Turkey's experience in this regard can produce much more mature and clear policies as well as significant and indispensable contributions to the alliances both in the west and east.
Therefore, Turkey's position in the disputes between Russia and the West will not be positional and tactical, unlike that of its allies, but rather on terms appropriate to the alliance and principles.
