In its search for security NATO is of utmost importance for Türkiye, but at the same time only 23,9 percent of the Turkish population is convinced that NATO would defend the country, if necessary, as a recent poll shows. Conflicts, a lack of trust and a very visible ideological and operational rift between the US and other NATO members characterized by the time before the summit and cannot be ignored. Türkiye’s politics of balancing and maintaining good relations with Russia despite its strong support for Ukraine, growing engagement with BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, its “polyalignment”, is seen with at least mixed feelings by alliance partners. Not only therefore, but the agenda also goes far beyond symbolic aspects, yet they matter too, and everyone expects “a family photo in Ankara without any empty chairs”.
The views and assessments expressed in the following contributions are those of the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung. All observers agree that we face a pivotal summit for the alliance, as well as regional and global security. Against this backdrop, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Türkiye invited five leading Turkish security experts to share their assessments about expectations in Türkiye, its actual threat perceptions, concrete steps expected from the outcome of the summit and finally about what role NATO plays within Türkiye’s wish for strategic autonomy, sovereignty and regional ownership.
The overall picture that emerges is a wish for a harmonious summit and a strong sign of unity by all members of the alliance is dominant. A strong commitment to Art. 5, a continued commitment to supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression and the implementation of the commitments adopted at the Hague Summit – especially the five-percent defense spending target – are expected. There is consensus for the US-wish for a fairer burden sharing inside NATO and a stronger European pillar. This, in the Turkish perspective, should not be limited to EU-countries but include non-EU-NATO-allies in all relevant areas of security and defense. For the Turkish arms industry in particular a more prominent role in the NATO context would be welcomed. There are concerns that not all EU-NATO members agree when it comes to the practical consequences of this approach.
When it comes to threat perceptions, Türkiye will insist on the 360-degree approach of NATOs security assessment. While especially for northern, northeastern and northwestern EU countries Russia is seen as the main threat, Türkiye´s perspective includes threats from the south: state fragility, terrorism, hybrid threats, and the security implications of irregular migration. Türkiye, the authors agree, wants to be seen as “regional power capable of creating and implementing regional solutions to regional challenges” and as a strong contributor to common security, rather than as a country merely benefiting from the security guarantees provided by others. As one author highlights: “The summit … is expected to reinforce the recognition of Türkiye´s role as a frontline ally, regional stabilizer, diplomatic intermediary, and important defence-industrial actor within NATO.”
Beyond strategic and military considerations, the authors also remind us that NATO sees itself based on shared values, on a commitment to democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law. The alliance internationally is watched especially under the aspect of sticking to these values and being credible not only in its military commitments. Especially in the “Global South” and its civil societies not everyone is convinced that there are always the same standards applied, democratic backsliding in some member states is well recognized. Many would welcome a signal from the summit that these concerns are also being taken seriously... For now, however, such expectations appear to remain in the realm of wishful thinking.
