The President of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has binned last Wednesday’s round of talks with Sweden and Finland on their membership of Nato as an interaction that was not at the “expected level”. This was an understatement, if ever there was one, to the degree that the government in Ankara is not in a position to say ‘yes’ to countries that by its lights support terrorism entering the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. 

The membership issue is now deadlocked and in the midst of Russia’s war in Ukraine. The Kremlin might be enjoying a quiet chuckle because Moscow, it would be pertinent to underline, is primarily against the expansion of the alliance. Turkey has objected to Sweden and Finland joining the Nato alliance and has thus held up a deal that would envisage a historic expansion in the face of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 

Advertisement

Mr Erdogan’s comments on Sunday would suggest that his stout opposition persists. “For as long as Tayyip Erdogan is the head of the Republic of Turkey, we definitely cannot say ‘yes’ to countries which support terrorism entering Nato,” he is reported to have told the media. 

Wednesday’s talks with Sweden and Finland made little headway and it was not clear when further discussions would take place… if at all. Not the least because there is an unmistakable degree of intransigence on the part of Turkey. Going by the certitudes of membership, all 30 Nato members must approve plans to enlarge the alliance. 

Turkey has challenged the attempts by Sweden and Finland on the ground that they harbour people linked to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a militant group, and others it deems terrorists. Yet another reason is that they had halted arms exports to Ankara in 2019. “We cannot repeat the mistake made in the past regarding countries that embrace and feed such terrorists in Nato, which is a security organization,” Mr Erdogan said. 

The alliance will have to countenance a heady cocktail of the Ukraine factor and Kurdistan, indeed international terrorism. Mr Erdogan may have valid reasons to oppose the membership of Sweden and Finland. The latest round has hit the reefs and is indeed a diplomatic passing show of the war in Ukraine. 

But with the return of normal conditions ~ very unlikely anytime soon ~ another attempt to induct Sweden and Finland into the strategic alliance can yet be made. The perspective must of necessity be expanded if Nato per se is to be enlarged. This will entail a solution to the red herrings across the membership trail. 

And also, of course, a healthier geopolitical construct. If Turkey is to have its way, it will be direly imperative to take care of the basics. This applies to all the stakeholders ~ Russia (Ukraine’s membership), Turkey (membership of Finland and Sweden), and the America-led grouping of nations that favours expansion. International geostrategy is on the test.