Tag Archives: turkey

In Much Hyped Speech, Nasrallah of Hezbollah says NOTHING

Posted on by Leave a comment

The same can be said for President Erdogan of Turkey, they both said a whole bunch of NOTHING or blah blah blah like the teacher from Charlie Brown. Stay alert and stay ready but don’t live in fear of these jackasses and their speeches, they don’t usually amount to much. When the shite really hits the fan you won’t know about it until it’s over, if you’re still alive.

Today’s video features other news they aren’t speaking about, like BANK FAILURES AND THE INTERNET GOING DOWN!

Nasrallah speech

Citizens Bank Fails

When the internet disappears

Turkey’s President says nothing as usual

Bitchute Video

Rumble Video

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we havePayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Paypal Link:  https://paypal.me/johnnystorm?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US

Nagorno-Karabakh separatist Republic ceases to exist

Posted on by Leave a comment

Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

The history of the breakaway Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) appears to be coming to an end. After the humiliation suffered by the local people with yet another military defeat by Azerbaijani troops, the local government opted for the dissolution of the secessionist state, dissolving public institutions and handing over the local territory to Azerbaijani forces.

On September 28, Artsakh President Samvel Shahramanyan issued a decree to end the state’s existence by January. In an official statement it was literally said that “the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh) ceases to exist”. Regarding the local people, it is said that ethnic Armenian citizens must “familiarize themselves with the conditions of reintegration offered by the Republic of Azerbaijan.”

The measure was taken “in connection with the current difficult military-political situation” and aims to save the lives of local citizens amid the growing process of ethnic cleansing promoted by Azerbaijani troops. To cease hostilities once and for all and guarantee conditions of coexistence between Armenians and Azeris, the authorities decided to give up political separatism, concluding a definitive process of capitulation.

As a region with an ethnic Armenian majority within the Azerbaijani territory, since 1991, Nagorno-Karabakh has struggled for international recognition. Seen by the global community as part of Azerbaijan, the Republic has only been officially recognized by other similarly separatist governments. However, relations with Armenia have guaranteed some level of stability for the region over the decades, avoiding direct conflicts with Baku.

This situation began to change radically in 2018, when Armenia experienced a pro-Western color revolution. The result of the local regime change was the rise of the current prime minister, Nikol Pashinyan, whose policies focused on reducing ties with Russia and moving closer to Western powers. With Moscow being the side most interested in maintaining peace in the Caucasus, the worsening of relations between both countries could have no other end than catastrophe.

In 2020, Armenia/Artsakh and Azerbaijan had a new military confrontation in which the Armenian forces were defeated, and there has been a strong regional security crisis since then. Victorious in the war, Baku increased its anti-Armenian policies several times in the following years, including by imposing a blockade on humanitarian aid to Artsakh between 2022 and 2023.

The deterioration of local security reached an extreme point when earlier in September the Azerbaijani government ordered the start of an “anti-terrorist operation” with the alleged aim of neutralizing Armenian military facilities in the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. The strikes killed dozens of ethnic Armenian civilians, but even so Yerevan cowardly refused to protect its people, claiming to have no troops in Artsakh and demanding military action against Baku from Russian peacekeepers.

Since 2020, Moscow has maintained peacekeepers in Artsakh under the terms of the trilateral agreement that ended hostilities that year. These troops, however, are few in number and their work is focused on peaceful and non-violent operations, such as rescue, demining and humanitarian aid. The Russians are not allowed to act militarily against either side in the conflict, which is why Pashinyan’s claims that it would be “Russian responsibility” to prevent the Baku operation are absolutely unfounded.

The Armenian government also requested Western help but did not receive any security guarantee – which was already expected, since the best scenario for Western interests is precisely chaos in the Caucasus. So, without any international support, the defense forces of Nagorno-Karabakh became absolutely incapable of protecting their claimed territory, leaving no option other than military and political capitulation.

Obviously, the decision to end the existence of the Republic was not accepted by all local politicians and separatist activists. For example, Artak Beglaryan, a former state minister and human rights ombudsman of Artsakh, said in social media: “Artsakh President’s decree on dissolving the Republic is illegal & illegitimate: 1. No President has the power to dissolve the Republic formed by the people with referendum; 2. That decree was signed as a result of Azerbaijani harsh aggression & threat of force. It’s null & void.”

From a legal point of view, this type of argument can be valid. Obviously, it is not a president’s right to dissolve an entire state by decree. But the particular case of Artsakh must be analyzed carefully, as it is a non-recognized separatist republic, and therefore does not have a conventional legal state structure.

Furthermore, even if “invalid”, Shahramanyan’s decision only admits the reality of Artsakh’s current situation. The Azeris already control the territory and if there is resistance on the part of the Armenians there will be greater chances of hostilities escalating. So, in practice, the government’s decision works as a conciliatory attempt to peacefully reintegrate the Armenian people into Azerbaijan and stop ethnic cleansing by Baku.

The problem is that this is unlikely to work in long term. Azerbaijan is a Turkish proxy and Ankara has expansionist interests in the Caucasus that will not be limited to the retaking of Nagorno-Karabakh. Indeed, there is a great possibility of Baku carrying out raids against Armenia’s undisputed territory in the future.

NATO’s objective is to place as many troops as possible close to the Russian border, which is why a Turkish incursion against Armenia would be “useful” for the West as it could “legitimize” the sending of forces under the excuse of “peacekeeping” – resulting in practice in the mere division of the Caucasus between Turkish and Western NATO forces. Only a responsible policy of friendship and military cooperation with Moscow will be able to avoid this.

 You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

Source: InfoBrics

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we havePayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Paypal Link: https://paypal.me/johnnystorm?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US

With pro-NATO politicians, security of Armenians is uncertain

Posted on by One comment

Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

The sides involved in the Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabakh conflict have fortunately reached a temporary ceasefire agreement. But the crisis seems far from over. Being governed by a pro-NATO junta, Armenia will have many problems in the near future, both in Artsakh and in its own territory, since evidently the West’s intention is to increase chaos in the region as much as possible.

There is no doubt that Nikol Pashinyan’s irresponsible and unpopular government is to blame for the recent escalations in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Having come to power through a pro-Western color revolution, Pashinyan has strived since 2018 to make Yerevan a NATO proxy state in the Caucasus, exponentially increasing ties between Armenia and countries such as the US and France while creating frictions with Russia.

Unable to achieve any real guarantee of security from his Western partners and adopting a hostile behavior towards Russia, Pashinyan led Armenia to absolute strategic weakness at a time of new high tensions with Azerbaijan, culminating in the attacks that occurred between 19 and 20 September during Baku’s so-called “anti-terrorist operation”. Cowardly, Pashinyan made it clear that he would not participate in the conflict, almost forcing the Armenians of Artsakh to surrender in order to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe.

More than 120,000 Armenians are now fearing their future in the face of Azerbaijani aggression, without being able to count on their partners in Yerevan to help in the crisis. In practice, Pashinyan “handed over” the lives of his compatriots to an enemy country, putting his own people at risk and showing a lack of concern for the safety of ethnic Armenians. All this to continue following the government’s number one goal, which is to please Western “allies”.

It must be remembered that Pashinyan’s Western “friends” made a real trap for Armenia by mediating the so-called “Prague agreements“. At the time, Yerevan recognized Azerbaijani sovereignty, which was mistakenly seen by the mainstream media as a “step towards peace”. The problem is that the agreement did not establish any real conditions to resolve the dispute over Artsakh, therefore serving to further legitimize Baku’s interest in the region. With Armenia recognizing Azerbaijani territorial integrity, the country was left without any justification to prevent further Azerbaijani aggressions against the ethnic Armenians of Artsakh.

In practice, Pashinyan legitimized Turkish-Azerbaijani expansionism in Nagorno-Karabakh and “authorized” the beginning of ethnic cleansing, abandoning more than 120,000 Armenians. This was the Western intention when promoting such an “agreement”, whose terms, instead of achieving peace, legitimized even more conflicts. This obviously serves Western interests, since in the face of new hostilities, Yerevan, unable to intervene, tends to request help from NATO – exactly as the Armenian Ambassador in Washington did – thus allowing Western troops to arrive in the region. In this scenario, Baku would certainly also request international help, calling the Turks. In the end, the Caucasus would become a NATO zone of influence and the Russian presence in the region would be minimized or even terminated.

Of course, all of this became clear recently, leading to a wave of mass protests and criticism against Pashinyan. In addition, the “Civil Contract” party received the lowest number of votes in five years in the last Council of Elders elections, being supported by only 32% of voters. There is evidently a crisis of legitimacy, and it is possible that the end of the Pashinyan era is a matter of time.

The main problem, however, is that Pashinyan is not an isolated agent. He is just one of the members of the pro-NATO junta that rules today’s Armenia. In addition to him, there are other politicians similarly willing to make Yerevan subordinate to Western plans. For example, the Secretary of the Security Council, Armen Grigoryan, who many analysts see as someone with the possibility of growing politically and becoming the new prime minister, is an even more pro-Western politician than Pashinyan.

Linked to the Soros Foundations, Grigoryan openly says that he will promote Armenia’s integration into NATO, advancing the policies started by Pashinyan. Furthermore, Grigoryan is already notorious for his pro-Western militancy, having even been accused of leaking confidential documents from the CSTO to NATO, which shows his high level of subservience to foreign interests.

So, unfortunately, there is no good expectation about the future of Armenia. The country would need to undergo a radical political change to reverse the catastrophic effects of the 2018 coup. If this does not happen, Yerevan will continue to be governed by pro-Western politicians, and the only point of divergence between them will be on how to be even more obedient to NATO.

Pashinyan increasingly seems to understand that he will be replaced by someone more “competent.” Not surprisingly, there are rumors that his wife recently started looking for estate in Switzerland and his son is already living in Canada. Unlike the Armenian people of Artsakh, Pashinyan will be able to leave the country with his family, not seeing firsthand the catastrophe he created for his own people.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

Source: InfoBrics

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we havePayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Paypal Link:  https://paypal.me/johnnystorm?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US

Prophecy, a Dry Time

Posted on by 3 comments

I got this in an email today and it’s another reason to stay in Gods word. One day soon it will be illegal to own and read from and you’ll need to be able to recall it when necessary. Write it on your heart.

Jeremiah 51:47 Therefore, behold, the days come, that I will do judgment upon the graven images of Babylon: and her whole land shall be confounded, and all her slain shall fall in the midst of her.

48 The heaven and the earth, and all that is therein, shall sing for Babylon: for the spoilers shall come unto her from the north, saith the LORD

My son, INFORM MY REMNANT THAT A DRY TIME IS COMING – A TIME WHEN HEARING MY VOICE WILL GROW SILENT AS THE JUDGMENTS COMMENCE IN EARNEST. 

 

I will speak to My children only to uplift and encourage them during the COMING PERSECUTION.  I will warn when My children need to escape, and I will lead them to safety. 

 

There will be A DRY TIME OF MY WORD being read – as all Bibles will be confiscated and destroyed.  The beast will have anyone who possesses My Word in print – arrested and killed.  You will be a threat to the new world order.

 

My son, A DRY TIME IS COMING, and only those who are well grounded in Me will hear My voice.  All that is to come has been revealed and written down by My watchmen and prophets.  Many people in My body do not believe I still use watchmen and prophets to warn those in My body. 

 

REPENT NOW! for your lack of faith and not believing!  I can do all things for the glory of the Father.

 

My son, A DRY TIME IS COMING, and the SHOUTING OF MY WARNINGS WILL CEASE, as all those who believe will have acted.  I have said many times to REPENT NOW, for you do not know when you will be standing before Me. 

 

The events foretold will come quickly and in succession – one after another.  There will be much death and destruction.  DO NOT BE CAUGHT UNAWARE as many in My body will be.

 

THE SHAKING WILL START SOON – AND THE WHOLE EARTH WILL FEEL IT.  NO ONE WILL BE LEFT UNSHAKEN.  

 

My son, hear now and say to these stiff-necked people – LEARN OF ME.  Take My mantle upon you and hide My Word in your heart.  Write My Word upon your heart and in a book that can be hidden.  Soon the forces of evil will declare My Word as HATE SPEECH and will impose fines and penalties to ALL who possess it. 

 

A DRY TIME is coming, and that will be when the DARKEST OF THE DARK TIMES are upon you. 

 

REPENT NOW! and study to show thyself approved. 

 

BRACE NOW! and prepare, My children, for DRY TIMES ARE COMING.

 

I love you all, and I WILL WATER YOU IN THE DRY TIMES.   

 

Amen.

Lord Jesus

 

U B Ready

West failed to depose Erdogan despite openly backing opposition

Posted on by Leave a comment

Pro-US Kilicdaroglu is not expected to win the 2023 Turkish election.

 

Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher

Although Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s victory in the second round of the presidential election in Turkey is almost assured ahead of the second round of votes, opposition leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu, in case of victory, would alter the country’s foreign policy and put the relationship with Russia into a framework that is acceptable to the US. The question surrounding Kilicdaroglu is whether he would introduce sanctions against Russia or turn Turkey away from its newfound independent foreign policy.

Turkey is heading to the second round of the election after Erdogan achieved a better-than-expected result in the polls and has a significant lead over his rival, but not enough to win in the first round. Neither Erdogan nor the opposition candidate received 50 per cent and will face off again on May 28.

The second round was expected, but Erdogan still surprised everyone by achieving a figure of nearly 50 per cent, precisely49.51% against Kilidaroglu’s 44.88%. Erdogan gained much more than the polls gave him credit for. Still, the pollsters often fail, especially in Turkey, because they do not include many groups of people, such as the diaspora, those who work in the state bureaucracy, nationalists, young people, and pensioners.

American President Joseph Biden did not influence the elections in Turkey and to the disappointment of the entire West, who openly expressed dissatisfaction with Erdogan’sincreasingly independent foreign policy. Erdogan is responsible for transforming Turkey from Kemalist ideology to a more Islamist one, and one not entirely beholden to the West, as has been the situation since the country became a NATO member in 1952.

Erdogan’s candidate rival has received much adulation from the West, which is constantly growing and will probably be connected to the constant effort to compromise Russia as an international actor. The current Turkish president never questioned the country’s membership in NATO because he did not want Turkey to be just a regular member of the Alliancebut rather a partner with independent interests that must berespected. This will characterise Ankara’s relations with the West even if Kemal Kilicdaroglu eventually prevails.

Kilicdaroglu’s statements about loyalty to NATO were made only in terms of electoral support because any criticism and belittling of Turkey would not be supported. The opposition leader will have to come to terms with the fact that Turkey is not the same as it was 20 years ago when Erdogan first became ruler of the country, but that now it is an independent regional power and that the Alliance is only one source ofsupport it receives. 

Even supposing that Kilicdaroglu eventually wins the election, he would be advised to maintain many elements of Ankara’s current official policy, such as Turkey’s relationship with the US and not changing military partnerships. Instead, the opposition leader would not help Russia too much to get out of isolation, like the oil hub, and there is still the question of whether he would introduce sanctions because it would becounterproductive for Turkey. 

One of the crucial issues related to these elections is the economic crisis that has hit Turkey. The bad news for Turkey is that inflation is almost 60 per cent, even if a large gas field has been reportedly discovered in the Black Sea.

Erdogan is attempting to remedy this situation, something he has already experienced twice. The main difference, however, is that previous economic crises were not before an election.To try and deal with the economic crisis, he raised the interest rates at which the state borrows money. This means that money was withdrawn from the market, which affected the poor the most. Today, Erdogan is looking for innovative solutions, but people are still determining how it will turn out. 

What is visible is that Kilicdaroglu needs to make a statement on the matter. The political program of the opposition is 250 pages long and full of ambiguities because Islamists, liberals, pro-Kurds, and nationalists are all cooperating. Effectively, the opposition leader can only hope to reach some saving arrangement with the West.

On the eve of the second round, the question arises regardingwhom the third-placed Sinan Ogan will support, especiallysince he received 5.2 percent of the voters’ support in the firstround. Ogan’s family are Azerbaijani, and he is essential in promoting pan-Turanism/Turkism. He also leads the anti-immigrant coalition, so neither Erdogan nor Kilicdaroglu suits him. However, he will have to pivot to one side, and it will be interesting to observe who he chooses.

With Kilicdaroglu representing the West and its interests, Erdogan represents independence and sovereignty to make decisions without interference. It is this dichotomy that Turks must choose between, and for now it seemingly appears that they are once against choosing Erdogan. 

Charles Lawson – What is it like in HELL??? Very Powerful Sermon

Posted on by One comment
YT link https://youtu.be/7rjFygmCpDc

This is definitely what we need to be sharing and talking about NOW as time is so short!

At the end of the day it’s the GOOD NEWS of John 3:16 that they don’t want us speaking about! Only Jesus Christ can save you from hell and death. He said it himself “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father but by me.” John 14:6

I’m still dealing with major neck/back issues which has led to these migraines. I will post what I can when I can. Thank you for the prayers 🙏and advice.

Sorosites make Armenia’s precarious strategic position much worse

Posted on by Leave a comment

How exactly does Yerevan plan to keep Moscow’s continued support to maintain security in Artsakh and even possibly enter into a conflict with Azerbaijan (and by extension Turkey) while the Sorosites keep making anti-Russian moves is anyone’s guess at this point.

Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

Russians and Armenians have been allies for centuries. Approximately a millennium of Seljuk and Ottoman oppression has essentially destroyed much of Armenia’s magnificent historical heritage. Luckily, it was Russia that saved the Armenian people from complete annihilation. Looking at the map of vast historically Armenian regions (now nearly all controlled by Turkey) and comparing it to modern-day Armenia and Artsakh (better known as Nagorno-Karabakh), it becomes clear that both areas combined are merely a sliver of land in comparison.

However, precisely Russia controlled both territories and prevented the Ottoman and later Kemalist forces from completing the horrendous Armenian genocide that nearly wiped out the Armenian people. This is the reason why Russian protection has been historically crucial for the small country in the volatile South Caucasus region.

Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Armenia enjoyed this protection. However, this started changing gradually in 2018, after the so-called “Velvet Revolution”, when the incumbent Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan took power. In the aftermath of what is widely believed to be yet another color revolution backed by the political West, particularly the so-called “philanthropists” such as the infamous George Soros, new authorities started distancing themselves from Russia.

The Armenian people, traditionally pro-Russian, were tricked into believing that the unfortunate color revolution was a true anticorruption uprising. However, it turned out that the real goal was much more sinister and had little to do with combating corruption. The following two years can only be described as a gift to the Neo-Ottoman ambitions of Turkey and Azerbaijan, with disastrous consequences for Armenia proper and Artsakh.

Prior to the 2018 color revolution, Azerbaijan was regularly engaging in skirmishes with the local Artsakh forces in an attempt to “defrost” and escalate the conflict which was more or less frozen since 1994. Each and every time, Russia intervened to prevent such escalation, including in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2018. However, that year, after Pashinyan took power, he started a campaign of sweeping anti-Russian “reforms” and moves that essentially distanced Moscow and Yerevan.

This included closing down Russian-language schools, as well as openly declared intentions to join the so-called “Euro-Atlantic integrations”, which essentially means joining the European Union and NATO. So, at that point, Russia was faced with a difficult choice – either help its historical ally which was (slowly but surely) turning into anything but, or leave Armenia to its own devices so as not to risk derailing the crucially important rapprochement with Ankara and Baku.

As previously mentioned, the results were catastrophic for Armenia, as Azerbaijan and Turkey coordinated an attack that left most of the territory of Artsakh taken by Azeri forces. However, even in this case, once again it was Russia that prevented the total defeat of Armenian forces after it brokered a peace deal that would stop the war just before Baku took all of Artsakh. Moscow deployed approximately 2000 peacekeepers whose presence is the only de facto security guarantee for the Armenian-populated republic.

And while Pashinyan was trying to blame Russia for his own failures, which includes denouncing Moscow for not going to war with Azerbaijan at the time when not even Armenia proper did, the new authorities allowed the US to drastically enlarge its Yerevan embassy. According to various estimates, this enabled Washington DC to house approximately 2000 people there, including what can only be a substantial number of intelligence operatives hardly amiable toward Russia.

This has been going on for years, particularly after Russia started its counteroffensive against NATO aggression in Europe. The latest anti-Russian move of the Sorosites in power has been the strong possibility they could ratify the Rome Statute and become a signatory party to the so-called “International Criminal Court” (ICC) at the time when it issued an illegal arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Chief Justice Arman Dilanyan officially ruled that this “wasn’t in conflict with the Armenian constitution”, paving the way for the country’s parliament to ratify the Rome Statute. Needless to say, if Yerevan were to do this, it would be obligated to arrest Putin in Armenia. Considering the fact that both countries are part of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), a military alliance that also includes Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, the move can be considered a strategic disaster for Armenia, as the CSTO is crucial to its security.

Since 2020, Russian peacekeepers have been controlling the last road (Lachin corridor) connecting Armenia and Artsakh. This is vitally important for Armenia, particularly at a time when Azerbaijan is seeking to blockade and cut off the rest of the Armenian-populated area. How exactly does Yerevan plan to keep Moscow’s continued support to maintain security in Artsakh and even possibly enter into a conflict with Azerbaijan (and by extension Turkey) while the Sorosites keep making anti-Russian moves is anyone’s guess at this point.

Worse yet, all this comes at a time when both Baku and Ankara are taking a somewhat neutral stance on the Ukrainian conflict, meaning that Moscow has very little (if anything) to gain from intervening on Armenia’s side, while it’s almost certain that it would result in getting two enemies at its southern flank, the last thing it needs at the moment. This could also have wider consequences for Russia’s Middle Eastern peace initiatives that include Syria and Iran. For the sake of the Armenian people, the Sorosites in power there should be held to account for such self-defeating decisions.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Turkey Earthquake, Syria Earthquake: Over 6,000 Dead In Turkey, Syria Quake

Posted on by 3 comments

Turkey Earthquake: Dozens of nations pledged aid after the 7.8-magnitude quake, which hit as people were still sleeping and amid freezing weather that has hampered emergency efforts.
— Read on www.ndtv.com/world-news/over-3-800-killed-after-3-catastrophic-earthquakes-hit-turkey-syria-3759495

Finland and Sweden beg Turkey for NATO’s membership as Ankara balancing between East and West

Posted on by Leave a comment

Uriel Araujo, researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts

Tensions between Washington and Turkey were visible in the November 16 meeting in Bali, when US President Joe Biden supposedly “snubbed” his Turkish counterpart. Washington has been pressing Ankara to approve the Swedish and Finnish bids, but Turkey remains inflexible. Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan arguably has been playing NATO quite skillfully, while there are signs the alliance is losing unity over a number of issues. However, Ankara faces many challenges as it struggles to balance its complex relationship with its NATO allies and with Eurasian powers Russia and China.

Finland is currently considering arms exports to Turkey, hoping the country will ratify its NATO membership. Turkey, a NATO member, has also demanded both Finland and Sweden take a tougher stance against Kurdish rebels. In November, the Swedish parliament in turn approved an anti-terror law, as demanded by the Turkish authorities in Ankara. Although Ankara is the only state opposing the two countries’ membership, Hungary has not ratified it yet either.

For NATO, the two Nordic countries are not the only issue involving Ankara. With the change in the Mediterranean power balance, tensions between Greece and Turkey (who have a decades-long territorial dispute) have been escalating since at least 2020, and experts have warned that this too could disrupt the North Atlantic unity. Greece has been supported by France in this matter – the former traditionally has entertained the ambition of a more independent Europe.

Amid such quarrels, Ankara has sometimes been described as masterfully balancing its relationship with both Washington and Moscow, remaining “neutral” in the current conflict in Ukraine while benefiting from this stance. For example, even American companies have been counting on Turkey as a conduit for trade with Russia (bypassing sanctions), and, in September, with the opening of the Black Sea corridor, a Russia-Turkey deal was sealed to ensure poorer countries would receive grains. The reality, in any case, however is that while being relatively isolated from the West, Ankara also has at times difficult relations with both Russia and China.

It is true that, amid the ongoing New Cold War, even though bipolarity seems to be back,  many emerging powers today are increasingly building on multi-alignment, non-alignment and multilateralism. They often do so by pursuing mutually beneficial bilateral relations with Beijing and Moscow, on the one hand, while balancing their relationship with Washington, on the other hand.

This way, a power such as India for instance, has been projecting itself as a kind of diplomatic giant, with a focus on its balancing power. However, as I’ve written, one can only “balance” and “reconcile” so much, and there are limits and challenges to “neutrality” and pragmatism. In India’s case, a more integral approach to Eurasia is needed.

Ankara in turn seems to attempt to position itself in a way that is, in some ways, analogous to India’s approach – by advancing Turkish-Chinese partnership on the Middle Corridor-BRI cooperation, for instance.

However, while India still can boast of being, to some extent, trusted by both sides in the Ukrainian conflict, Ankara’s situation is more complicated. Its relations with Moscow have always been complex (one can recall the 2015 crisis), and already in early 2021 showed signs of deterioration.

For example, it is widely understood that Russian peacekeepers in Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh, in the Armenia–Azerbaijan border) have been acting as a kind of shield against the expansion of Ankara-promoted pan-Turkism in the Caucasus, a region where Turkey has visibly played a clearly destabilizing role. Turkish aggressive policies arguably threaten stability in Eurasia as a whole, as can be seen not only in the aforementioned Armenian border, but also in the disputed Aegean Sea islands, in Kashmir, Iran, Syria, and even in the Russian borders.

Turkish interests pertaining to enhanced cooperation with China and other states are part of its larger aspirations for becoming a new hegemon in its region. These ambitions however, including Ankara’s promotion of Pan-Turkist and Turanist concepts (amid  neo-Ottomanist ambitions) have destabilizing potential and thus trouble key partners in Eurasia, including China itself. Geopolitically and geostrategically, the interests of Turks clash with those of Russians and the Chinese in Central Asia and the Caucasus. There is also a Moscow-Ankara rivalry in the Middle East, their proxy competition in Libya being notorious.

Both Russia and Turkey have patrolled the northeast of Syria, cooperating in the struggle against terrorism. However, Turkish support for Ukrainian moves in the Donbass region remains a major issue and so is Turkey’s NATO membership, as Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoygu stated in March, remarking it is an impediment to cooperation.

While an organization such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), for instance, focuses more on security and stability issues, NATO, on the other hand, increasingly sees its mission as being the defender of certain (Western) values. Turkey is a Dialogue Partner of the SCO. It is a very difficult task “balancing” healthy Eurasian-Turkish relations with, on the other hand, remaining a member of an organization almost solely devoted to antagonizing Moscow and Beijing. India, for example, is both a full-member of SCO and a QUAD member and, that being so, already faces many challenges to its “balancing” role. Turkish status as a NATO member is even more complicated in that regard.

Amid such a complex geopolitical game, it remains to be seen how long an aggressive Ankara will manage to balance its intricate relations with both the West, and with China and Russia.

Source: InfoBrics

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon and PayPal are gone so now we have Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

« Older Entries