Turkey:
America’s NATO Ally with Chinese Weapons?
Turkey’s
View Turns Towards the East
By
Peter Edel
7
July, 2013
Earlier
this year NATO stationed American, German and Dutch Patriot air
defense systems in Turkey, to offer protection against an unlikely
missile attack from Syria. Turkish defense specialists were
introduced this way to the special qualities of the Patriots. A
fortunate concurrence of circumstances, since Turkey is in the market
for its own air defense system. Raytheon, the American producer of
the Patriots, cooperated with the Turkish defense industry before and
was preparing the contracts already.
Turkey’s
ruling justice and Development Party (AKP) decided differently. No
Patriots for Turkey, at least not for the time being. Instead the
Turkish government is interested in the Chinese equivalent of the
Patriot. Turkey’s NATO allies were amazed. A NATO country with a
Chinese weapon is something bizarre to begin with, but there are also
practical objections. The Chinese system is simply not compatible
with the NATO infrastructure. It does not connect to the early
warning system of NATO, which is designed to protect Europe and
Israel from evil plans made in Iran. In other words, Turkey can shoot
with Chinese missiles, but is not able to locate its target.
Because
the friend/foe detection system used by NATO does not connect with
the Chinese air defense missiles, it is also difficult to combine
them with Turkey’s F-16 fighter jets. Another complicating factor
is that NATO does not want to see the top-secret data of the
friend/foe system end up in Chinese hands. The Turkish plans will
certainly be seen as a risk factor in this respect.
Turkey
mentioned (acceptable) technology and low price as advantages of the
Chinese proposition. The Turkish defense industry could also obtain
valuable know-how through a deal with China. However, the advantages
do not compensate for the incompatibility with systems used by other
NATO countries. Ankara must be quite aware of this. It has been said
that the Turkish government pretends interest in the Chinese system
to push western weapon manufacturers into offering better delivery
conditions. But even if that’s the case, it remains interesting
that Turkey plays this maneuver through China.
The
understanding between China and Turkey has its ups and downs. There’s
a conflict about the Uighur people in the Xinjiang province, who are
in cultural and religious ways related to Turks. The Turkish
government supports their struggle for independence, which of course
annoys China. Violent repression against protesting Uyghurs in 2009
was followed by sharp Turkish condemnations of China. PM Erdogan
spoke of genocide, while his trade minister called for a boycott of
Chinese products.
However,
the following year relations between the two countries improved
suddenly, resulting in agreements on trade and the exchange of
technology. Furthermore, Turkey became a dialogue partner last year
of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a Eurasian security
organization of China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and
Uzbekistan. The SCO treaty includes cultural and economic
cooperation, but the members are also participating in collective
military drills. In this respect the SCO is seen as a counterpart to
NATO. That’s why international observers took it as quite
extraordinary when Turkey established official relations with the
SCO.
PM
Erdogan described Turkey’s decision to become a dialogue partner of
the SCO as a signal expressing the Turkish (im) patience concerning
EU membership. Erdogan’s statement had something of a threat: speed
up the EU accession process, or NATO loses a partner. The recent
Turkish interest in air defense missiles manufactured in China is a
similar signal.
But
Turkey won’t resign from NATO overnight. Erdogan may have joked
with Russian President Putin about full-fledged SCO membership for
Turkey, but in the short run severe differences of opinion are ruling
this possibility out. On Syria the approaches are extremely different
for instance. Turkey wants an end to Bashar Al-Assad’s regime as
soon as possible, while China, Russia and Iran (which has an observer
status in the SCO) are having more understanding for the situation of
the Syrian president – to say the least.
But
the differences may be temporarily. In the long run Turkey could very
well grow towards the SCO. The ‘international conspiracy’
government representatives were seeking behind Istanbul’s Gezi park
protest is significant. The ease by which the US and the EU were
believed to be part of a scheme against Turkey indicates the changes
in the perception of the outside world. If this anti-western stance
continues, European politicians may have to consider how, and in
which form Turkey can be kept on board. Or in the longer run there
may be the risk that this strategically situated country with its
fast growing economy will be absorbed by an eastern sphere of
influence.
From
an anti-imperialist point of view it could of course be amusing to
see NATO lose one of its most valued members. Yet, Turkey’s turn
towards the East could also have grave effects on the human rights
situation. For the SCO is not expected to punish Turkey for human
right violations the way the European Court for Human Rights (ECHR)
is used to. Therefore, a stronger alliance with the SCO will give
free rein to undemocratic tendencies in Turkey. In other words, the
move towards the East does not seem to augur very well for Turks
cherishing western liberties and European democratic standards.
Peter
Edel is an analyst and investigative journalist based in the
Netherlands. He is a regular contributor to Boiling Frogs Post.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.