The Greek card up Stoltenberg’s sleeve didn’t work

Read Time:3 Minute, 37 Second

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, at the NATO summit in Madrid 28-30 June, was going to push for the acceptance of Finland and Sweden, whose accession had been blocked by Turkey. The word “push” describes the process well because a voluntary compromise seemed less likely. And in the negotiations, the US and NATO used very peculiar tools of “persuasion”.

Turkey was willing to engage in dialogue, but not to be potential members of the Alliance. The leaders of the organisation were not very keen on making any concessions. In the first round of talks, the country was represented by Turkish presidential aide Ibrahim Kalın, who made it clear in advance that he would defend the Turkish position. “In our opinion, we have brought the issues under discussion to a certain point. We cannot take a step back”, he said in an interview on Haberturk TV ahead of the summit.

Recall that Finland and Sweden, amid Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, submitted applications to the NATO secretary general on 18 May to join the alliance. Turkey blocked the start of the process of considering these applications. Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said Ankara could not say “yes” to Finland and Sweden’s membership in NATO because it could not believe their assurances that they had no ties with representatives of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which is banned in Turkey.

The Scandinavian countries have been slow to change their foreign and domestic policies to join NATO. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, speaking to Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson, said he saw no tangible progress in resolving Stockholm’s concerns. Finland’s leadership has been even more straightforward in its aspirations. According to a government-initiated poll, a majority of Finnish citizens (70%) do not want the legislation or the country’s established practices to be changed for the sake of Turkey’s conditions for NATO membership. This was reported by the Helsingin Sanomat newspaper, citing the results of the survey. It is unlikely that they wanted to lift the arms embargo on Turkey and the US.

In order to do nothing, but realise their goals, the leaders of the bloc decided to act through the “third” member of NATO, Greece. By strengthening its military presence in the Dodecanese archipelago, the Greeks were to blackmail Turkey and make it more “compliant”. The reaction of the Turkish side was very harsh. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated that Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis ‘no longer exists’ for him and he ‘will never meet him’. “Extremely harsh and rhetoric” could be used to describe Ankara’s response to the anti-Turkish actions of Mitsotakis, who, while in the US, persuaded the White House and Congress not to sell arms to the Turks under any circumstances. However, there is great doubt as to who “persuaded” whom and was the real initiator of this political theatre.

Greek media has constantly whipped up hysteria over the situation in the Aegean Sea and reported that the issue will be raised at a summit in Madrid. Indeed, in response to Greece’s aggressive actions, Turkey has issued a notice to close three areas in the central Aegean “for hydrographic survey” and Akşam newspaper published a map of Greek islands that “are subject to immediate demilitarisation. The Greek government’s behaviour sparked negative reactions throughout Turkish society, including among forces that oppose Erdogan. The head of the Kemalist DSP party, Yonder Aksakal, spoke about the need to clarify the legal status of the Dodecanese Islands.

This blackmail, invented by the NATO leadership, failed. Even before leaving for the summit, the Turkish president stated with Greece in mind that NATO member states should not pose a threat to each other, and Finland and Sweden, which aspire to join the alliance, should take this fact and Turkey’s interests into account. The unity of Turkish public opinion and Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s position brought its positive outcome. On 28 June, Turkey withdrew its veto on Finland and Sweden’s NATO applications under the Memorandum signed by the parties, and in return, the Nordic states promised to meet all Turkish demands. Turkey benefits from the tough and intransigent position. There is still a long struggle ahead for the implementation of what has been promised, but with this approach, it will be possible to meet the demands not only for the Finns and Swedes, but also for the US.