Turkey’s Delicate Balancing Act Amid the Ukraine Conflict
Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, Turkey has managed to maintain a delicate balancing act, positioning itself as an ally to both sides while benefiting economically and politically from its relationships with both. Turkey has publicly condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and has provided diplomatic and material support to Ukraine’s war efforts. However, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has chosen not to join Western-led sanctions against Russia or sever ties with Moscow.
While Turkey’s neutrality in the Ukraine conflict has been tolerated thus far, both the United States and Russia are growing impatient and may be pushing Turkey to take a more decisive stance. In September 2023, the U.S. Treasury Department imposed sanctions on Turkish companies and a businessman accused of helping Russia evade U.S. sanctions. Additionally, Erdoğan’s attempts to revive a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin that allowed the export of Ukrainian grain shipments through Turkey’s straits and stabilized global food prices have failed.
These recent developments suggest that both Washington and Moscow are seeking to pressure Turkey into making a clear choice. Signs of Erdoğan bending to this pressure are already emerging. On October 25, 2023, Erdoğan signed Sweden’s NATO accession protocol and sent it to Parliament for ratification, despite previously refusing to endorse the move. This move has frustrated Turkey’s NATO allies and may indicate that Turkey’s balancing act is becoming unsustainable. However, it could also be another tactical move in Erdoğan’s larger geopolitical chess game as he aims to position Turkey as a diplomatic force in the escalating conflicts in the Middle East.
Historical Context
Erdogan’s approach aligns with Turkey’s long-standing foreign policy trajectory. Throughout history, Turkey has managed to balance its relationships between Western European powers and Russia. This strategy dates back to the 18th century when Russia emerged as a regional player along Turkey’s northern border. Turkey’s ability to maintain this delicate balance allowed the Ottoman Empire, Turkey’s predecessor, to survive the 19th century relatively intact despite pressure from European powers and Russia. On the other hand, Turkey’s failure to employ a balancing strategy in World War I led to its demise as it allied with the losing Central Powers. In contrast, a strategy of neutrality in World War II helped Turkey avoid significant damage.
During the Cold War, Turkey sought refuge under Western security guarantees due to the mounting Soviet threat. It joined NATO in 1952 to protect itself. In the 1990s, after the Soviet threat diminished, Turkey sought greater foreign policy autonomy but lacked the resources and domestic political will to fully realize this ambition. This led to alignment with U.S. policies in the Middle East and Balkans until the early 2010s.
Splintered Support
Recent events have strained Turkey’s relationship with the United States and other Western countries. U.S. support for Kurdish forces in northern Syria, which Turkey considers aligned with the militant Kurdistan Workers’ Party, and the 2016 coup attempt against Erdoğan marked the beginning of a more confrontational relationship between Turkey and the U.S.
In response, Erdogan began to cultivate closer ties with Putin, who openly supported him during and after the coup attempt. However, Turkey’s acquisition of Russian-made S-400 missiles led to its removal from the U.S.’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program and a set of U.S. sanctions on Turkey’s defense industry. Critics argue that Turkey’s proximity to Russia and its military interventions in Syria have diminished its reliability as a partner in NATO.
Despite Turkey’s attempts to strengthen ties with Russia, the relationship eventually reached a deadlock after a Russian bombardment in northern Syria resulted in the deaths of 34 Turkish soldiers in February 2020. This prompted an effort to seek reconciliation with the U.S., though the Biden administration has been hesitant due to concerns over Erdogan’s authoritarian rule.
The Balancing Act and Ukraine
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine provided an opportunity for Erdogan to further his balancing act. Turkey’s control of major straits and established ties with Ukraine and other states along the Black Sea gave Turkey significant leverage in maintaining a multifaceted and neutral approach. Erdogan hoped that maintaining trade relations with Russia and providing arms to Ukraine would benefit the Turkish economy and improve his image in the West.
However, Erdogan’s decision to block Sweden’s and Finland’s entry into NATO early on in the conflict drew resentment from Washington and Brussels. As the conflict continued and Erdogan’s popularity waned in the lead-up to the May 2023 elections, the sustainability of Turkey’s balancing act came into question once again.
In need of support, Erdogan turned to the West and Gulf countries for financial and political assistance. He approved Finland’s NATO accession and forged economic deals with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, two rivals in the Middle East. In the summer of 2023, Erdogan announced a new cabinet with a pro-Western outlook. He also repaired relations with Egypt, another regional rival, in line with the changing balance of power in the Middle East shaped by the U.S. and its allies. At the July 2023 NATO summit, Erdogan announced the withdrawal of his veto against Sweden’s NATO accession.
Erdogan’s pro-Western moves have been met with cautious optimism by Western leaders, who have offered both incentives and sanctions. The U.S. extended a $35 billion World Bank credit to aid Turkey’s economy while penalizing Turkish entities for violating U.S. sanctions. These actions serve as a message for Turkey to take a definitive stance in its foreign affairs. Erdogan has also received a similar message from Putin, who chose not to renew the Ukrainian grain deal despite Turkey’s successful mediation earlier on in the conflict.
Future Prospects
While Erdogan may face pushback from both the U.S. and Russia, this does not necessarily signify the end of his middleman strategy. Turkey’s geographic location as a gateway between Europe and Asia and its historical ties to neighboring regions provide Erdogan with opportunities to sustain and expand a strategy of neutrality among regional and global actors.
Recent developments in the South Caucasus and the escalating conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza further complicate Erdogan’s balancing act but also provide more room for maneuvering. Turkey has been a key supporter of Azerbaijan’s military offensive in Nagorno-Karabakh, highlighting Russia’s diminishing influence in the region and creating difficulties for Iran. Erdogan’s ties with both Hamas and the Israeli government open up opportunities for him to mediate and play a diplomatic role in these conflicts.
As an expert on Turkish politics and international affairs, I continue to observe Erdogan’s delicate balancing act and the evolving dynamics in the region. While there are challenges ahead, Turkey’s historical precedent and strategic positioning provide Erdogan with opportunities to navigate the complexities and maintain his middleman strategy.
About the Author
Ozgur Ozkan is an expert in Turkish politics and international affairs. He is affiliated with Tufts University.
