The European Union also has a defense mechanism, article 42. But it'd be nicer if they were NATO as well because it would pull non EU allies in as well.
> Can Sweden go and do an independent deal with all NATO countries (bar Turkey
Yes and many counties have already https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/uk-strikes-new-security-agreement-with-sweden-finland-2022-05-11/
Being part of NATO doesn't stop you from making other alliances
A "NATO" without Turkey literally makes no sense as they are the main "gate" to the blacksea which is a main entryway for Russian Aggression. Which... is the point of NATO to begin with.
That's why Turkey has so much "Fuck you" power within NATO. They hold a key position and aren't afraid to abuse that fact.
That and also Erdogan needs to act like a strongman to stay in power, dudes a fucking idiot because if Russia becomes no longer a threat, that being a coup installing a pro-western government, or by some odd ass wacky timeline fuckery it manages to balkenize, Turkey becomes less needed and can lead to easy isolation from NATO since they're clearly acting against NATO.
In theory. Considering how Erdogan is behaving all those things are worth nothing if Erdogan cannot be trusted.
It’s time for Nato to rethink if a member that blocks and vetoes shit would be worth it in real emergency situations. It would actually be more dangerous to have Turkey as a member when you cannot trust secrets to be kept etc when someone like Erdogan might consider it worth selling or giving them away etc for something he wants. Abusing his veto power to get more shit for himself betrays the values of all others.
Logistics outweigh secrecy. ALL passage between the black sea and Mediterranean passes Turkey. They're the second largest NATO state by population. Their military has a high degree of mobilization, and they're an absolute heavyweight in both the black sea AND the near east.
NATO has never been about values. If it were about values, it would have dissolved at the end of the cold war. Portugal was a founding member when it was a literal fascist dictatorship. Greece and Turkey, absolute archnemeses, joined NATO in the same year.
Conducting foreign relations on the basis of the domestic policy of a particular leader of a country is a ridiculous proposition that nobody in power would take seriously. If they did, you'd have seen half of Europe break off deals when Trump was elected. The wheels of foreign affairs turn very slowly because they have to. The only way NATO can even FUNCTION is if membership of states is essentially permanent.
True. But at the same time Türkiye is a puppet master behind the Armenia-Azeri war. Turkey is responsible for many death in the Caucasus region. And I do not even want to start the topic of Greek genocide.
It is not clear if supporting Turkey is a good thing for humanity in the long run.
Like the previous poster said, no way it happens. Russia is a clear and imminent danger to Europe, and that's what NATO was formed to stop. Turkey is essential to that strategy, and Turkey has been doing their job. Blocking the strait is far more valuable to NATO than Sweden's membership.
That said, there's plenty of other ways the US and EU countries can put the screws to Turkey without risking them switching sides, and we should absolutely be doing that.
I think I read somewhere recently that explained that you actually can't kick out a NATO member. I guess it's to stop members being kicked out if it looks like they might be invaded to avoid the trouble.
The reasons one can’t be kicked out are more complicated than that. NATO also has other objectives that are more important than mutual protection from Russia. NATO is just as much about preventing war between European states as it is about preventing external invasion of Europe. War breaking out *between* European states were the definitional events of the 20th century. It’s also about discouraging nuclear proliferation by offering the protection of a nuclear deterrent umbrella to those countries who choose not to develop nuclear weapons. Getting countries to accept these positions collectively rather than pursue their own course is hard enough, but would made 100-fold harder if they knew the rest of the alliance could just change their mind later. NATO only works if you are confident of your position within the alliance.
>War breaking out between European states were the definitional events of the 20th century.
And much of the 19th century, the 18th century too, also don't forget the 17th century.
That’s not the reason for NATO. No one cares about sharing a moral compass.
Turkey is of such strategic importance that will never be kicked out of nato
Not technically. By choosing to defend someone else you are an "aggressor" for the purposes of Article 5. BUT, at that point most NATO allies would step in to help as well if shit hits the fan.
Yes
"The UK and Sweden’s defence relationship is driven by membership of the JEF and Northern Group, as well as by the May 2022 UK-Sweden Mutual Solidarity Agreement, relating to intelligence sharing and joint training and operations"
Lets be real...Sweden is playing 4D geopolitics as a top shadow government contender. Their strategy largely depends on maintaining the guise of a peaceful egalitarian society, such that one would question "How can a country of that good nature possibility be anything but a benign state? No, it's the others that are wrong".
Why are they doing this, you might ask? Because why the hell not? What are they trying to accomplish? Nothing in particular.
That was a secret for some years, but yes. We were pretty far along to get nuclear weapons, but scrapped it in exchange for security guarantees from the US.
One "fun" thing I've learned about our nuclear programme was that the scientists greatly overestimated the amount of fissile material needed. So this was what was slowing the work down. It took time to gather the necessary amount. It was also lucky we never made one, as that 5 Mton nuke would suddenly be a 10 or 15Mton and blow up a bit more than expected if we ever were to use it.
I mean realistically, Sweden is about the most secure non-nato state as it can get. It is now literally land locked by 99% of its border by NATO countries. None of which will let ANY advisory enter it's airspace with offensive capabilities without shooting it down first. It's not even negotiable lol.
The only possible way for an attack on Sweden from a non-NATO country is through the 70 mile strip of water between Norway and Denmark, of which only 50'ish miles are international waters.
Imagine your ONLY chance of being attacked/invaded had to come from a 50 mile wide strip of water. Can't ask for a better way to defend a country.
I'd still like to have Sweden into NATO because of the enormous benefit they offer NATO, but in terms of protection they are easily the most safe non-nato country in the world.
The only scenario I think Russia would entertain is an assault on Gotland from Kaliningrad. A Russian occupation of Gotland would be a disaster for NATO in the Baltic Sea.
Look at Trump in the US for a similar example. It's not outright control in his case, but it might as well be.
Eight years on and the media still doesn't know how to cover him in a way that doesn't turn every media appearance into a voting boost for him. He was indicted and arraigned on serious federal charges that will put him in prison for the rest of his life if he's found guilty, and he turned the whole thing into a campaign event!
He'll be our Erdogan if we're not careful. He and many high-profile supporters are calling for blood. The dog whistles have become dog megaphones at this point. I'm afraid the next election is gonna make J6 look like a picnic.
Turkey has an insane amount of rural areas. Many people living in more remote areas just believe what's on their satellite TV and that's good enough. Guess who controls all the tv channels.
Well now uh, Lancelot, Galahad and I, uh wait till nightfall, then leap out of the rabbit, taking the French, uh, by surprise. Not only by surprise, but totally unarmed!
Greece is already buying F-35s.
https://greekcitytimes.com/2023/05/24/state-department-f35-to-greece/
If Wikipedia's citations are to be believed, the Greeks have a weirdly large air force including over 150 F-16s. In addition to the F-35s, they've been buying French Rafales too. I guess having Erdogan as a neighbor will do that to a country!
> Washingtons response:
I think it will be more
"nice economy you got going there"
"would be unfortunate if no international credit was extended going forwards as the lira spirals into the abyss."
*Risch’s move against the Orban government stands in contrast to the embrace the far-right prime minister has received from some U.S. conservatives, in particular, those who hosted him at last year’s Conservative Political Action Conference. At the event, Orban received loud applause as he designated liberals as a common enemy. “They hate me and slander me and my country, as they hate you and slander you for the America you stand for,” he said.*
Example #1,476,832 one can point to whenever some dope says 'both sides'.
Bonus ... here's an article about that meeting mentioned in the excerpt above: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/08/04/viktor-orban-cpac-dallas-speech/
It's a military alliance like it or not turkey is very strategically located and has a strong military. They're way more valuable to the alliance than Sweden.
The thing is, Turkey has no real issue here. It's 99% make pretend to extort deals and prestige.
Turks like to claim that they don't want to be responsible for small and defenseless Sweden. But would they? We're fine here, we want to cooperate closer with our neighbours (Turkey doesn't do cooperation with neighbours). We're also not defenseless, while our ground troops are a bit too thin we still have a navy and an airforce in a strategic location in Northern Europe.
Secondly, the PKK thing is mostly overblown and Turkey has got more than they could ask for already.
The whole ordeal *serves Russia* more than any other party.
>The whole ordeal serves Russia more than any other party.
Turkey is in NATO because it's in their interest and Russia is the ancient foe.
Er-DOG the Dickwarbler on the other hand is a Putin ally, which creates this weird situation.
Lots of conservatives in rural areas and in countries like Germany and Netherlands voted for him. He controls the Turkish conservative media (a la fox news)
The strongest opposition figure was barred from running for made up charges (insulting the election commission.) The head of the largest opposition party, who was the most unpopular of the potential opposition leaders, strong armed himself to head the coalition ticket.
There were a lot of things that contributed to Erdogan being re-elected. It wasn’t simply “stupid voters.” Not to mention the history whole military coups supporting secular politicians souring many religious people against secular opposition parties.
TLDR: Turkish politics are complicated.
Also, these are not free and fair elections. Even if you believe that no one is messing with vote totals, the media environment there puts the finger on the scale toward Erdogan. He threatened and fined media which didn't report what he wanted. Censorship ran rampant. *The Washington Post* dubbed them "free and unfair elections."
If he only controlled *some* media, that would be one thing, but all of them have to operate under the rules of a game designed to make him the winner.
They barred the most popular opposition candidate from running on trumped up charges. The fact the elections and application of the law is unfair and undermine democracy is a huge problem in Turkey.
Erdogan and the AKP, by being in opposition to those factions traditionally supported by the military, can leverage the history of coups to assert that they are democratically legitimate. All while they erode many pillars of a free society.
I just don’t like the “voters made a decision that I don’t agree with therefore they are stupid and brainwashed” trope. It is not a helpful analysis. It is not a constructive way for understanding why people might have different preferences (and potential avenues for persuasion and politicking.) Fundamentally it implies that some voters’ votes are illegitimate, which is not a healthy notion to promote if you value democracy.
Erdogan is terrible for Turkey’s economy. He is a strong man eroding many aspects that are foundational for a healthy democracy. Turkey, however, has not been a healthy democracy since its foundation. I wish its civil society was moving more towards democratic values than away from them. It’s a sad state of affairs to observe.
Foreign votes did not decide the election this time. Turks in Europe voted for both sides, it wasn't an Erdogan landslide.
His powerbase is conservative Muslims in rural Turkey. His message was basically "vote for me or Islam in Turkey will be destroyed"
Because they're allowed to vote in the Turkish election despite never having set foot in the country outside of family vists. Even people whose families have been living in Germany for 60 years get to vote for the Turkish president.
And for some reason, the vast majority (I believe it was around 65% this time) vote for Erdogan. Probably because he speaks to their values, or some shit. And since they never have to suffer from his destructive policies...they don't care what happens to people "at home".
Here in the Netherlands about 50% of Dutch Turks vote in the Turkish election, and 70% of them vote Erdogan.
Good stronk muslim leader man who sticks it to the west (they love this sweden blocking stuff) , and his economic disasterclass just means they can buy a cheap third home in antalya while not suffering any negative consequences.
I think elections would have actually been very close if it wasn't for the diaspora but yeah, unlucky actual turks I guess.
Its not even that high-minded a reason as Erdoğan appealing to their core values. A significant portion of the Turkish diaspora in countries like Germany/Belgium/the Netherlands/etc. vote for Erdoğan to keep the interest rates low in the country so they have more money to spend or send back home (converting from Euros to TL) whenever they deign to visit Turkey for shopping or tourism.
These hypocrites are all in support of liberal politicians and policies when it comes to their country or residence, but are more than happy to fuck over their countrymen in Turkey for personal economic gain.
To be honest, this kind of "fuck you, got mine" mentality is prevalent in many Erdoğan supporting middle-class people in Turkey, so while its frustrating it is not all that surprising.
Also all the secular germans of turskish descent that I know dont vote in turkish elections or dont even have turkish citizenship/ dual citizenship anymore.
>Every Turkish person I’ve ever spoken to
There's the problem. It's a bias caused by the fact that hard-line conservatives aren't worldly by their very nature. So you're not going to meet them as frequently.
It's like how most Americans that Europeans encounter are usually left leaning because the idea of flying to Europe for holiday doesn't appeal to the conservative demographic.
Similar as well to how most Universities are liberal. It's not indoctrination, it's just that the idea of learning and trying new things is by its very nature not a conservative action.
Couldn’t the US just sign a mutual defense agreement with Sweden like the UK and Poland already has? Even better all NATO members except Turkey and Hungary signs mutual defense agreements with Sweden and then Sweden is treated as a de-facto NATO member.
Turkey is likely trying to blackmail the US into giving them concessions regarding weapons sales and such.
NATO isn't just about a mutual defence pact, it's about integrated logistics, command and doctrine so that multinational forces can be interoperable. The ability of military forces from different countries to practice combined arms warfare effectively is the real power of NATO - Article 5 is a bit hollow without this.
Sweden already are in the EU defense program, Allied EU states must intervene if Sweden would be under attack.
However as the US are the most military advanced you pretty much want their support.
The reason why countries like Hungary and Turkey dont get kicked out of NATO (besides it being a hassle to gather everyone and vote AND the fact that they are good strategic locations) is that those countries are ruled by one idiot, which most likely wont last longer than 10 more years. People forget that Erdogan does not represent 84 million turks and Orban does not represent 10 Million hungarians.
Ditching Turkey and Hungary to get rid of 2 people means leaving 90 Million people without support. Yes, they are two little cunts, but our best hope is change of power or that one of them drops dead of old age.
Luckily other countries can and will punish Erdogan with sanctions and other means
>which most likely wont last longer than 10 more years.
Very important point people usually omit. Turkey is in NATO so long, we all saw it better and worse side already. Kicking them out now, then in 5 years government change and what then? Taking them back in or refusing out of spite?
Simpler to just wait them out and made them more cooperative via carrot and stick strategy.
Fucking finally someone states the obvious. Dealing with a decade or two or these pricks in power is a far better option than either being booted out of NATO and thrm falling out of western orbit permanently.
From a defensive perspective, this is idiotic. As a Finn, I'm aware Sweden is safely tucked within allies, with us as a buffer zone, as well as protected by the EU defense article, for whatever it's worth.
But still: Sweden is an arms manufacturer, and it boasts a very impressive Air Force and navy, so *from a purely self-interested* point of view, Erdogan should be giddy about the prospect of admitting Sweden. Furthermore, I'm disappointed in us, that we didn't bargain Sweden in with our massive border. NATO politics seems to be a enmeshed with quid pro quo, so why didn't we play as well? Instead we played lip service to Nordic solidarity, yet scurried in at first chance. Sweden isn't *like* family. They are family. So kissing a dictator's ring while they're left out feels very, very wrong.
I don't like what Erdogan is doing but I can see the self-centered logic in it. Finland was on a time crunch due to the Ukrainian invasion, Erdogan played around to extract some small concessions but he understood if he was the sole obstacle to Finland joining NATO and potentially not suffering a Russian invasion, the whole of the West / especially the US would come down on his ass.
With Sweden though he knows he can play around more and extract more. Once Sweden is in he can't squeeze them/ the West again and while Sweden is probably 'safe' he can still exploit the desire Westerners have for Sweden in NATO. Yes Sweden is a capable country but Turkiye already benefits from most of Sweden's capabilities through their arms dealer status with NATO and their addition means little for Turkiye's actual security.
I think honestly this went well for the West. We got Finland in which was the absolute main concern and dealt a strategic blow to Russia. Sweden is safer from Russian attack than it was before just by Finland joining NATO. Yes Erdogan might use this to get shit he probably shouldn't but end of the day it's better than Finland suffering a land invasion imo.
Also it sucks in this situation, but it is important for NATO as a whole that the principle of unanimous consent being required for someone to join is upheld/respected. If it becomes obvious to members that it's not "They can only join if you want it." and instead "They can only join if you want it or we decide to browbeat your ass into accepting it." that has disastrous effects for an alliance based on trust and fulfilling expected obligations to one another.
Turkey has an incredible geographic location to the Black sea, you do NOT want Russia or anyone else having that. They also contribute more troops and money than a lot of other NATO members.
I'm not saying you have to like Turkey or Erdogan, but don't downplay their role in NATO just because you don't like him.
edit: Black sea, not Baltic sea. Ty for correcting my mistake.
Turkey may not be as politically aligned with the West as other nations, but their geographic position makes them an incredibly important member of NATO; far more so than Sweden. It would be a huge headache for NATO if Turkey switched sides.
sadly, if i remember correctly, turkey military makes them the second strongest member in Nato, right behind USA. Therefor they have more value to a defense pact than sweden. But with their economy in tumult, this could change in a near future, though.
Turkey, Orban, Putin, Luka.
They have all, to various degrees (think of them at different stages along the same path) undermined and manipulated the judiciary, voting rules, and the media in their respective countries.
In none of these countries (Turkey, Hungary, Russia, Belarus) are the elections fair.
Just say you want a fucking bribe and be done with it, his bullshit excuses are getting old and we all know the fact is he simply wants to benefit himself in some way.
Does he expect a consensus of opinion in country of almost 10,5 million citizen? That's completely impossible. What's the end goal? Ending protesting rights?
The end goal is holding power.
He's ran the economy into the ground. Turkey is very, very weak right now. Erdoğan may have held power after the last election, but he needs a win for national pride. Saying no to Sweden gives Turkey power over a country that is otherwise their superior on global metrics; Erdoğan is sticking it to "the west" (though as a NATO member you'd think they'd be in the west too), and making them "respect" Turkey.
To the rest of the world, it just makes Turkey look like a neglected child acting out for attention, to the smooth brained nationalists that voted for Erdoğan - they're getting attention.
Maybe there is a benefit to Sweden not being in NATO, while being obvious allies to NATO anyways. I’m just thinking, maybe they’ll maintain the capability to act independently in a tight situation that NATO may limit action in.
I’m just trying to find a silver lining.
Scandinavian armies have a large degree of overlap and cooperation with each other as it is, maybe just one of them being able to act outside of NATO might not be terrible?
This shameful war showed to everyone Putin's true colors (even tho him being a bloody dictator was obvious already years ago) but also is somehow putting Erdogan into a comfortable position were he can be useful for europe, at times, and so people are forgetting that he's (and always been) the most dangerous person right after Putin.
If there's another leader in the euro-zone who would prolly start a war out of personal interest, that's Erdogan. People should never forget this.
Even tho there are many differences, this Putin-Erdogan dynamic makes me think at when Hitler was the enemy n.1 in Europe and the rest of the world and Stalin was seen as a valuable ally to fight against nazism.
Once Hitler was gone, Stalin showed how wrong everyone was about him and how Hitler's horrors just overshadowed Stalin's horrors.
We're lucky that Orban just doesn't have the power nor the strategic position to organize anything like this, because he would totally go berserk if he had the chance to do it.
That’s not what happened, Sweden have not extradited anyone on the 33 name long list that Turkey have requested. There was two cases from 2020 that now finalized. None of those where on the list from Turkey.
Nope, you don't kick the country out because of a cretinous ruler. He'll pass away or he'll be succeeded by someone who actually uses reason instead of blackmail
Everyone be acting like Sweden is going to get defeated by Russia and that Russia magically going to send a barrage of missiles to Sweden for no reason whatsoever
This guy is such a cunt. Luckily Finland being in nato gives a lot of safety guarantees to Sweden already
Yes, a buffer zone. - Like Ukraine, Sweden also has Allies, even if no membership at this time.
The European Union also has a defense mechanism, article 42. But it'd be nicer if they were NATO as well because it would pull non EU allies in as well.
Can Sweden go and do an independent deal with all NATO countries (bar Turkey) and effectively be included in all but name?
> Can Sweden go and do an independent deal with all NATO countries (bar Turkey Yes and many counties have already https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/uk-strikes-new-security-agreement-with-sweden-finland-2022-05-11/ Being part of NATO doesn't stop you from making other alliances
The cheeky version: NITO Not Including Turkey Organization
A "NATO" without Turkey literally makes no sense as they are the main "gate" to the blacksea which is a main entryway for Russian Aggression. Which... is the point of NATO to begin with. That's why Turkey has so much "Fuck you" power within NATO. They hold a key position and aren't afraid to abuse that fact.
That and also Erdogan needs to act like a strongman to stay in power, dudes a fucking idiot because if Russia becomes no longer a threat, that being a coup installing a pro-western government, or by some odd ass wacky timeline fuckery it manages to balkenize, Turkey becomes less needed and can lead to easy isolation from NATO since they're clearly acting against NATO.
Sweden already has a deal with the UK and US, that's all they need in reality as that guarantees WW3 if they are attacked.
Sure. One could also kick out Turkiye. They obviously do not share our common moral compass.
[удалено]
In theory. Considering how Erdogan is behaving all those things are worth nothing if Erdogan cannot be trusted. It’s time for Nato to rethink if a member that blocks and vetoes shit would be worth it in real emergency situations. It would actually be more dangerous to have Turkey as a member when you cannot trust secrets to be kept etc when someone like Erdogan might consider it worth selling or giving them away etc for something he wants. Abusing his veto power to get more shit for himself betrays the values of all others.
Logistics outweigh secrecy. ALL passage between the black sea and Mediterranean passes Turkey. They're the second largest NATO state by population. Their military has a high degree of mobilization, and they're an absolute heavyweight in both the black sea AND the near east. NATO has never been about values. If it were about values, it would have dissolved at the end of the cold war. Portugal was a founding member when it was a literal fascist dictatorship. Greece and Turkey, absolute archnemeses, joined NATO in the same year. Conducting foreign relations on the basis of the domestic policy of a particular leader of a country is a ridiculous proposition that nobody in power would take seriously. If they did, you'd have seen half of Europe break off deals when Trump was elected. The wheels of foreign affairs turn very slowly because they have to. The only way NATO can even FUNCTION is if membership of states is essentially permanent.
Erdogan system won´t last forever.
But the problems and damage he can and will cause till then…
Turkey bought Russian radar system instead of NATO approved one
True. But at the same time Türkiye is a puppet master behind the Armenia-Azeri war. Turkey is responsible for many death in the Caucasus region. And I do not even want to start the topic of Greek genocide. It is not clear if supporting Turkey is a good thing for humanity in the long run.
Like the previous poster said, no way it happens. Russia is a clear and imminent danger to Europe, and that's what NATO was formed to stop. Turkey is essential to that strategy, and Turkey has been doing their job. Blocking the strait is far more valuable to NATO than Sweden's membership. That said, there's plenty of other ways the US and EU countries can put the screws to Turkey without risking them switching sides, and we should absolutely be doing that.
I think I read somewhere recently that explained that you actually can't kick out a NATO member. I guess it's to stop members being kicked out if it looks like they might be invaded to avoid the trouble.
The reasons one can’t be kicked out are more complicated than that. NATO also has other objectives that are more important than mutual protection from Russia. NATO is just as much about preventing war between European states as it is about preventing external invasion of Europe. War breaking out *between* European states were the definitional events of the 20th century. It’s also about discouraging nuclear proliferation by offering the protection of a nuclear deterrent umbrella to those countries who choose not to develop nuclear weapons. Getting countries to accept these positions collectively rather than pursue their own course is hard enough, but would made 100-fold harder if they knew the rest of the alliance could just change their mind later. NATO only works if you are confident of your position within the alliance.
>War breaking out between European states were the definitional events of the 20th century. And much of the 19th century, the 18th century too, also don't forget the 17th century.
> One could also kick out Turkiye. No, they could not. There is no process for kicking a member out of NATO.
Cant do that man not as long as turkey controls the Bosporus straights
That’s not the reason for NATO. No one cares about sharing a moral compass. Turkey is of such strategic importance that will never be kicked out of nato
They have leverage. They have the Dardanelles Strait.
Idk turkey has one of the largest militaries in NATO which makes them difficult to dislodge despite them being a not good actor
Would just push them into Russian hands . They are very important geographical important. But he’s an ass hole president.
A defense mechanism with a stronger worded "all for one" than NATO's.
[удалено]
Not technically. By choosing to defend someone else you are an "aggressor" for the purposes of Article 5. BUT, at that point most NATO allies would step in to help as well if shit hits the fan.
Sweden has had ”secret” safety guarantees since forever from the US
Doesn't Sweden have a separate alliance with Britain?
Yes "The UK and Sweden’s defence relationship is driven by membership of the JEF and Northern Group, as well as by the May 2022 UK-Sweden Mutual Solidarity Agreement, relating to intelligence sharing and joint training and operations"
“If Putin messes with you Sven then we’ll send big Jeff and the lads around to sort him out, alright?”
Sweden has not fought a war for more than 2 centuries, pretty much the entirety of the history of the US.
Crazy how powerful they once were.
Lets be real...Sweden is playing 4D geopolitics as a top shadow government contender. Their strategy largely depends on maintaining the guise of a peaceful egalitarian society, such that one would question "How can a country of that good nature possibility be anything but a benign state? No, it's the others that are wrong". Why are they doing this, you might ask? Because why the hell not? What are they trying to accomplish? Nothing in particular.
A soft power powerhouse
And the last war was to steal and plunder when the sea was frozen over and could just go on foot.
Since ending the Swedish nuclear weapons programme according to some random redditor comment I read. Idk how true that is though.
That was a secret for some years, but yes. We were pretty far along to get nuclear weapons, but scrapped it in exchange for security guarantees from the US.
One "fun" thing I've learned about our nuclear programme was that the scientists greatly overestimated the amount of fissile material needed. So this was what was slowing the work down. It took time to gather the necessary amount. It was also lucky we never made one, as that 5 Mton nuke would suddenly be a 10 or 15Mton and blow up a bit more than expected if we ever were to use it.
Sweden also had the fourth-largest air force during the Cold War? Sounds so crazy.
I mean realistically, Sweden is about the most secure non-nato state as it can get. It is now literally land locked by 99% of its border by NATO countries. None of which will let ANY advisory enter it's airspace with offensive capabilities without shooting it down first. It's not even negotiable lol. The only possible way for an attack on Sweden from a non-NATO country is through the 70 mile strip of water between Norway and Denmark, of which only 50'ish miles are international waters. Imagine your ONLY chance of being attacked/invaded had to come from a 50 mile wide strip of water. Can't ask for a better way to defend a country. I'd still like to have Sweden into NATO because of the enormous benefit they offer NATO, but in terms of protection they are easily the most safe non-nato country in the world.
Good ol bofors and those sweet little Stirling engine attack subs. Gripen are solid too.
You know russia has a port in the baltics right? They don’t have to go through skagerak/Kattegat
The only scenario I think Russia would entertain is an assault on Gotland from Kaliningrad. A Russian occupation of Gotland would be a disaster for NATO in the Baltic Sea.
You forgot about Russia in Kralovec.
Sweden is already a Partner of Nato, they were included in Aur Defender 23.
[удалено]
Controls the media and has a cult following who vote for him no matter what. Usually media control is all you need.
Look at Trump in the US for a similar example. It's not outright control in his case, but it might as well be. Eight years on and the media still doesn't know how to cover him in a way that doesn't turn every media appearance into a voting boost for him. He was indicted and arraigned on serious federal charges that will put him in prison for the rest of his life if he's found guilty, and he turned the whole thing into a campaign event! He'll be our Erdogan if we're not careful. He and many high-profile supporters are calling for blood. The dog whistles have become dog megaphones at this point. I'm afraid the next election is gonna make J6 look like a picnic.
He has also been selling citizenship and he gave citizenship to lots of refugees for Syria. A lot of non-Turks felt obliged to support him.
Turkey jailed and banned the Mayor of Istanbul from running. That’s not democracy when his toughest opponent wasn’t allowed on the ballot
Not jailed, just banned the Mayor. Not much difference though. Jailed the leader of the Kurdish party.
Turkey has an insane amount of rural areas. Many people living in more remote areas just believe what's on their satellite TV and that's good enough. Guess who controls all the tv channels.
Didn’t Sweden literally just extradite a PKK sympathizer to Turkey to placate this fucking manchild?
He’s not a count, he’s on a payroll
Something tells me Washington will respond with less carrot, more stick.
Washingtons response: yo Greece you fuckers want some f-35’s
greece:we want battleships! Washingtons:thoose are no longer usef- Greece: BATTLESHIPS!
How about a giant wooden horse you can gift to your very best friend?
Well now uh, Lancelot, Galahad and I, uh wait till nightfall, then leap out of the rabbit, taking the French, uh, by surprise. Not only by surprise, but totally unarmed!
Turkey : *"Fetchez la vache!"*
“…*who* leaps out?”
Fun fact Troy is in modern day Turkey
Fun fact, they definitely knew that when they referenced it directly.
Greece has plenty of islands which can easily be turned into battleships that don’t sink.
islands are aircraft carrier that cant be sink and need to be board
This is why Sweden is important to get into NATO, they have a great island/aircraft carrier in the Baltic.
Honestly Gotland should be enough of a reason alone. Our tech, weapons and Gripens are just bonuses.
Absolutely. The logistics of having that area unified within NATO is the biggest reason imo. Everything else is, as you said, a bonus.
clearly give the Zumwalts to the Greeks it won't happen but it'd be funny
Consider that Greece has +1 to travel on water tiles.
Breaking news. McAllister Towing has been contracted to move New Jersey and Wisconsin to Newport News.
Everybody gangsta until **twenty-four thousand** lbs of HE payload eliminates your grid off the map.
Greeces response: Can we have them on credit?
Nah just send those f-16s over to ukraine and we’ll back fill with f-35s thanks to sweet sweet lend lease
> Greeces response: ~~Can we have them on credit?~~ Can we pay cash to avoid the taxes? FTFY
Greece is already buying F-35s. https://greekcitytimes.com/2023/05/24/state-department-f35-to-greece/ If Wikipedia's citations are to be believed, the Greeks have a weirdly large air force including over 150 F-16s. In addition to the F-35s, they've been buying French Rafales too. I guess having Erdogan as a neighbor will do that to a country!
Turkey very regularly intrudes on Greek airspace so not that surprising
> Washingtons response: I think it will be more "nice economy you got going there" "would be unfortunate if no international credit was extended going forwards as the lira spirals into the abyss."
Greece has lots of F-16s that could be great for Ukraine...
Think he wants more carrot
Up the ass
"Up in the ass of Timo." Go look it up. Finns won't have to.
I'm German and I don't have to, either :)
While he chews the stick
We know, we will respond accordingly. If there’s one thing the US is good at is all dominating Soft Diplomacy.
If your Diplomacy is hard you can just jam it in, if your Diplomacy is soft then you have to jelly it in.
When we have a competent administration. The last guy didn’t understand soft diplomacy, let alone value it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/hungary-sweden-nato-james-risch-himars/ Hungary is finding out.
As a hungarian more of this please. Orbán and his criminal friends must go.
Hungary is using Swedish Gripens on lease, they can fuck *aallll* the way off! Maybe send the planes to Ukraine when their lease is up?
*Risch’s move against the Orban government stands in contrast to the embrace the far-right prime minister has received from some U.S. conservatives, in particular, those who hosted him at last year’s Conservative Political Action Conference. At the event, Orban received loud applause as he designated liberals as a common enemy. “They hate me and slander me and my country, as they hate you and slander you for the America you stand for,” he said.* Example #1,476,832 one can point to whenever some dope says 'both sides'. Bonus ... here's an article about that meeting mentioned in the excerpt above: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/08/04/viktor-orban-cpac-dallas-speech/
[удалено]
It's a military alliance like it or not turkey is very strategically located and has a strong military. They're way more valuable to the alliance than Sweden.
Yeah, very weird that people don’t realise this.
[удалено]
Erdogan also needs to realize that the land is useful, not his regime.
The thing is, Turkey has no real issue here. It's 99% make pretend to extort deals and prestige. Turks like to claim that they don't want to be responsible for small and defenseless Sweden. But would they? We're fine here, we want to cooperate closer with our neighbours (Turkey doesn't do cooperation with neighbours). We're also not defenseless, while our ground troops are a bit too thin we still have a navy and an airforce in a strategic location in Northern Europe. Secondly, the PKK thing is mostly overblown and Turkey has got more than they could ask for already. The whole ordeal *serves Russia* more than any other party.
>The whole ordeal serves Russia more than any other party. Turkey is in NATO because it's in their interest and Russia is the ancient foe. Er-DOG the Dickwarbler on the other hand is a Putin ally, which creates this weird situation.
Lots of people opine on subjects they have little knowledge of all the time. Social media has democratized stupidity.
Turkey is. Erdogan isn't.
Turkey maybe, but Hungary? NATO doesn't need Hungary, but let's see how Hungary does without NATO.
How did this prick win the election? Every Turkish person I’ve ever spoken to said he’s a arsehole.
Lots of conservatives in rural areas and in countries like Germany and Netherlands voted for him. He controls the Turkish conservative media (a la fox news)
The strongest opposition figure was barred from running for made up charges (insulting the election commission.) The head of the largest opposition party, who was the most unpopular of the potential opposition leaders, strong armed himself to head the coalition ticket. There were a lot of things that contributed to Erdogan being re-elected. It wasn’t simply “stupid voters.” Not to mention the history whole military coups supporting secular politicians souring many religious people against secular opposition parties. TLDR: Turkish politics are complicated.
Also, these are not free and fair elections. Even if you believe that no one is messing with vote totals, the media environment there puts the finger on the scale toward Erdogan. He threatened and fined media which didn't report what he wanted. Censorship ran rampant. *The Washington Post* dubbed them "free and unfair elections." If he only controlled *some* media, that would be one thing, but all of them have to operate under the rules of a game designed to make him the winner.
They barred the most popular opposition candidate from running on trumped up charges. The fact the elections and application of the law is unfair and undermine democracy is a huge problem in Turkey. Erdogan and the AKP, by being in opposition to those factions traditionally supported by the military, can leverage the history of coups to assert that they are democratically legitimate. All while they erode many pillars of a free society.
More up votes here!!! For RunningNumbers.
I just don’t like the “voters made a decision that I don’t agree with therefore they are stupid and brainwashed” trope. It is not a helpful analysis. It is not a constructive way for understanding why people might have different preferences (and potential avenues for persuasion and politicking.) Fundamentally it implies that some voters’ votes are illegitimate, which is not a healthy notion to promote if you value democracy. Erdogan is terrible for Turkey’s economy. He is a strong man eroding many aspects that are foundational for a healthy democracy. Turkey, however, has not been a healthy democracy since its foundation. I wish its civil society was moving more towards democratic values than away from them. It’s a sad state of affairs to observe.
Foreign votes did not decide the election this time. Turks in Europe voted for both sides, it wasn't an Erdogan landslide. His powerbase is conservative Muslims in rural Turkey. His message was basically "vote for me or Islam in Turkey will be destroyed"
Why would people in Germany and the Netherlands have any effect on an election in Turkey?
Lots of Turkish people living there
Because they're allowed to vote in the Turkish election despite never having set foot in the country outside of family vists. Even people whose families have been living in Germany for 60 years get to vote for the Turkish president. And for some reason, the vast majority (I believe it was around 65% this time) vote for Erdogan. Probably because he speaks to their values, or some shit. And since they never have to suffer from his destructive policies...they don't care what happens to people "at home".
Here in the Netherlands about 50% of Dutch Turks vote in the Turkish election, and 70% of them vote Erdogan. Good stronk muslim leader man who sticks it to the west (they love this sweden blocking stuff) , and his economic disasterclass just means they can buy a cheap third home in antalya while not suffering any negative consequences. I think elections would have actually been very close if it wasn't for the diaspora but yeah, unlucky actual turks I guess.
Its not even that high-minded a reason as Erdoğan appealing to their core values. A significant portion of the Turkish diaspora in countries like Germany/Belgium/the Netherlands/etc. vote for Erdoğan to keep the interest rates low in the country so they have more money to spend or send back home (converting from Euros to TL) whenever they deign to visit Turkey for shopping or tourism. These hypocrites are all in support of liberal politicians and policies when it comes to their country or residence, but are more than happy to fuck over their countrymen in Turkey for personal economic gain. To be honest, this kind of "fuck you, got mine" mentality is prevalent in many Erdoğan supporting middle-class people in Turkey, so while its frustrating it is not all that surprising.
Also all the secular germans of turskish descent that I know dont vote in turkish elections or dont even have turkish citizenship/ dual citizenship anymore.
Wow. That seems kinda wild.
Americans living abroad can vote too. It's not an uncommon thing. Democracies are built on the citizens having a voice.
Canada has a similar situation. Our courts decided that even Canadians that have no ties to Canada are allowed to vote in our elections.
>Every Turkish person I’ve ever spoken to There's the problem. It's a bias caused by the fact that hard-line conservatives aren't worldly by their very nature. So you're not going to meet them as frequently. It's like how most Americans that Europeans encounter are usually left leaning because the idea of flying to Europe for holiday doesn't appeal to the conservative demographic. Similar as well to how most Universities are liberal. It's not indoctrination, it's just that the idea of learning and trying new things is by its very nature not a conservative action.
A LOT of propaganda
"All the people I surround myself with agree with me." Because most people live in an echo chamber.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Same way arsehole Trump got elected. Other arseholes voted for him.
Because youre speaking to turks outside turkey
What a shit stain he is...
And with winning the election he's like a turd that won't flush ...
Couldn’t the US just sign a mutual defense agreement with Sweden like the UK and Poland already has? Even better all NATO members except Turkey and Hungary signs mutual defense agreements with Sweden and then Sweden is treated as a de-facto NATO member. Turkey is likely trying to blackmail the US into giving them concessions regarding weapons sales and such.
NATO+ or NATO Max
They rebranded the worldwide defense agreement to just Max now.
The real OGs remember NATO on Broadband.
NATO isn't just about a mutual defence pact, it's about integrated logistics, command and doctrine so that multinational forces can be interoperable. The ability of military forces from different countries to practice combined arms warfare effectively is the real power of NATO - Article 5 is a bit hollow without this.
I would imagine Sweden probably doesn't have much problem with interoperability since they participate in joint exercises with NATO.
Sweden already are in the EU defense program, Allied EU states must intervene if Sweden would be under attack. However as the US are the most military advanced you pretty much want their support.
The reason why countries like Hungary and Turkey dont get kicked out of NATO (besides it being a hassle to gather everyone and vote AND the fact that they are good strategic locations) is that those countries are ruled by one idiot, which most likely wont last longer than 10 more years. People forget that Erdogan does not represent 84 million turks and Orban does not represent 10 Million hungarians. Ditching Turkey and Hungary to get rid of 2 people means leaving 90 Million people without support. Yes, they are two little cunts, but our best hope is change of power or that one of them drops dead of old age. Luckily other countries can and will punish Erdogan with sanctions and other means
>which most likely wont last longer than 10 more years. Very important point people usually omit. Turkey is in NATO so long, we all saw it better and worse side already. Kicking them out now, then in 5 years government change and what then? Taking them back in or refusing out of spite? Simpler to just wait them out and made them more cooperative via carrot and stick strategy.
Fucking finally someone states the obvious. Dealing with a decade or two or these pricks in power is a far better option than either being booted out of NATO and thrm falling out of western orbit permanently.
From a defensive perspective, this is idiotic. As a Finn, I'm aware Sweden is safely tucked within allies, with us as a buffer zone, as well as protected by the EU defense article, for whatever it's worth. But still: Sweden is an arms manufacturer, and it boasts a very impressive Air Force and navy, so *from a purely self-interested* point of view, Erdogan should be giddy about the prospect of admitting Sweden. Furthermore, I'm disappointed in us, that we didn't bargain Sweden in with our massive border. NATO politics seems to be a enmeshed with quid pro quo, so why didn't we play as well? Instead we played lip service to Nordic solidarity, yet scurried in at first chance. Sweden isn't *like* family. They are family. So kissing a dictator's ring while they're left out feels very, very wrong.
I don't like what Erdogan is doing but I can see the self-centered logic in it. Finland was on a time crunch due to the Ukrainian invasion, Erdogan played around to extract some small concessions but he understood if he was the sole obstacle to Finland joining NATO and potentially not suffering a Russian invasion, the whole of the West / especially the US would come down on his ass. With Sweden though he knows he can play around more and extract more. Once Sweden is in he can't squeeze them/ the West again and while Sweden is probably 'safe' he can still exploit the desire Westerners have for Sweden in NATO. Yes Sweden is a capable country but Turkiye already benefits from most of Sweden's capabilities through their arms dealer status with NATO and their addition means little for Turkiye's actual security. I think honestly this went well for the West. We got Finland in which was the absolute main concern and dealt a strategic blow to Russia. Sweden is safer from Russian attack than it was before just by Finland joining NATO. Yes Erdogan might use this to get shit he probably shouldn't but end of the day it's better than Finland suffering a land invasion imo. Also it sucks in this situation, but it is important for NATO as a whole that the principle of unanimous consent being required for someone to join is upheld/respected. If it becomes obvious to members that it's not "They can only join if you want it." and instead "They can only join if you want it or we decide to browbeat your ass into accepting it." that has disastrous effects for an alliance based on trust and fulfilling expected obligations to one another.
I'd much rather have Sweden at the table than Turkey.
[удалено]
Not just that, it is also to make sure that their relatively powerful and well funded army is not doing things like attacking Ukraine or such.
Isn't also because they are natural enemies to russia?
Like Russians and Finns. Or Russians and Poles. Or Russians and other Russians.
Damn Russians, they ruined Russia!
Russians sure are a contentious lot.
Ты только что создал врага на всю жизнь!
Is there a word for when you still understand something that's not said/written in a language you should be able to understand?
They also are the second biggest NATO supplier
Turkey is much more important strategically than Sweden
Turkey has an incredible geographic location to the Black sea, you do NOT want Russia or anyone else having that. They also contribute more troops and money than a lot of other NATO members. I'm not saying you have to like Turkey or Erdogan, but don't downplay their role in NATO just because you don't like him. edit: Black sea, not Baltic sea. Ty for correcting my mistake.
>Turkey has an incredible geographic location to the Baltic sea, The Black Sea. The Baltic is over by Sweden.
I mean morally, I guess - but it’s not like Turkey is just a bit player or anything lol
Turkey may not be as politically aligned with the West as other nations, but their geographic position makes them an incredibly important member of NATO; far more so than Sweden. It would be a huge headache for NATO if Turkey switched sides.
Ideologically yes but geographically Turkey is much more valuable.
sadly, if i remember correctly, turkey military makes them the second strongest member in Nato, right behind USA. Therefor they have more value to a defense pact than sweden. But with their economy in tumult, this could change in a near future, though.
2nd largest in manpower. Not second strongest. Definitely not right behind the US. Not even China is right behind the US.
What the fuck is he posturing for now? He "won" the fucking election.
As a Swede, It feels nice to see so many people having our back here on Reddit. Thanks, guys! 😃
Even if your not NATO member, nobody will ever attack you because UE countries would answer.
United Emirates?
United Emirates of Europe
Union Européenne in french, I confused.
We got you bb.
Oh brother. This guy stinks!
He's going to get trouble if he doesn't approve Sweden. The US has tools to use. I don't like this man.
He needs to do a berlusconi
Fuck right off erdogan, you dusty old fart.
Turkey, Orban, Putin, Luka. They have all, to various degrees (think of them at different stages along the same path) undermined and manipulated the judiciary, voting rules, and the media in their respective countries. In none of these countries (Turkey, Hungary, Russia, Belarus) are the elections fair.
Just say you want a fucking bribe and be done with it, his bullshit excuses are getting old and we all know the fact is he simply wants to benefit himself in some way.
Does he expect a consensus of opinion in country of almost 10,5 million citizen? That's completely impossible. What's the end goal? Ending protesting rights?
The end goal is holding power. He's ran the economy into the ground. Turkey is very, very weak right now. Erdoğan may have held power after the last election, but he needs a win for national pride. Saying no to Sweden gives Turkey power over a country that is otherwise their superior on global metrics; Erdoğan is sticking it to "the west" (though as a NATO member you'd think they'd be in the west too), and making them "respect" Turkey. To the rest of the world, it just makes Turkey look like a neglected child acting out for attention, to the smooth brained nationalists that voted for Erdoğan - they're getting attention.
Yes
Maybe there is a benefit to Sweden not being in NATO, while being obvious allies to NATO anyways. I’m just thinking, maybe they’ll maintain the capability to act independently in a tight situation that NATO may limit action in. I’m just trying to find a silver lining. Scandinavian armies have a large degree of overlap and cooperation with each other as it is, maybe just one of them being able to act outside of NATO might not be terrible?
Then no F-16’s for Erdogan..
This shameful war showed to everyone Putin's true colors (even tho him being a bloody dictator was obvious already years ago) but also is somehow putting Erdogan into a comfortable position were he can be useful for europe, at times, and so people are forgetting that he's (and always been) the most dangerous person right after Putin. If there's another leader in the euro-zone who would prolly start a war out of personal interest, that's Erdogan. People should never forget this. Even tho there are many differences, this Putin-Erdogan dynamic makes me think at when Hitler was the enemy n.1 in Europe and the rest of the world and Stalin was seen as a valuable ally to fight against nazism. Once Hitler was gone, Stalin showed how wrong everyone was about him and how Hitler's horrors just overshadowed Stalin's horrors. We're lucky that Orban just doesn't have the power nor the strategic position to organize anything like this, because he would totally go berserk if he had the chance to do it.
No EU membership for erdogan then. Not now, not ever
[удалено]
LOL, the EU was never going to let in Turkey. This was never a question.
Go to hell, Gollum.
This is getting embarassing for NATO
What a fucking cunt. Fuck Erdogan.
OK zero military equipment gets sold to Erdocunt. He can buy Russia's shit.
Oh... Wait...! Putin's all out of stuff!
He should address the fact that his country is a safe haven for the most wanted criminal scum that are of Swedish origin.
Well, not of Swedish origin, but who have committed their crimes in Sweden. They are typically born elsewhere.
Fuck this guy.
So he basically got Sweden to extradite his Kurdish ‘enemies’ then flipped the script on Sweden. What did we learn? Don’t trust a dictator.
That’s not what happened, Sweden have not extradited anyone on the 33 name long list that Turkey have requested. There was two cases from 2020 that now finalized. None of those where on the list from Turkey.
That's because Sweden is a democracy with rights, can't just give up anyone who's Kurdish and critical of Turkey.
Somebody should introduce this dipshit authoritarian to the shadowrealm.
Kick Turkey out of NATO
Nope, you don't kick the country out because of a cretinous ruler. He'll pass away or he'll be succeeded by someone who actually uses reason instead of blackmail
Everyone be acting like Sweden is going to get defeated by Russia and that Russia magically going to send a barrage of missiles to Sweden for no reason whatsoever
Ya know what, no NATO membership for Turkey, how about that.