【Special Attention】
Guangming Daily reporter Feng Yuan
The Russian-Ukrainian conflict continues to ferment, and the European security landscape is brewing profound changes in turmoil. The nordic countries of Sweden and Finland, in departing from their traditions of neutrality, have come as a surprise to many. Turkey, nato's southeast gateway, suddenly attacked Ruifen and Finland, obstructing the two countries from joining NATO, which surprised many people.
Swedish Prime Minister Anderson held a joint press conference with visiting Finnish President Niinistö on May 17 to announce that the two countries would jointly submit an application to join NATO. Xinhua News Agency
NATO will seek expansion after the arch fire
On May 18, Sweden and Finland formally submitted applications for nato membership; on may 19, the leaders of the two countries went to the White House to meet with the PRESIDENT, which means that the two countries have taken an important step in the process of joining NATO, and also marks that the tradition of neutrality between the two countries is rapidly being broken.
Currently, there are 7 neutral countries in the world, with Sweden and Finland among them. Sweden and Finland have long adhered to the principle of neutrality and served as a strategic buffer between Russia and the West. However, after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, in the context of the deterioration of relations between Russia and the United States and Europe, the proportion of people supporting NATO in Sweden and Finland has increased significantly. In fact, after Russia's military campaign against Crimea in 2014, neither the People of Sweden nor Finland have had a stronger desire to join NATO.
Sweden's application for "enrolment" with Finland was strongly supported by the United States. On May 19, U.S. President Joe Biden said during a meeting with visiting Finnish and Swedish leaders at the White House that the United States "fully supports" the two countries' accession to NATO.
The accession of The Two Countries is of great significance to nato, led by the United States. With the accession of these two countries, the Baltic Sea will become NATO's "inland sea", Russia's ancient capital and one of the most important cities St. Petersburg will also be within the scope of NATO's deterrence, Russia's gateway to the Baltic Sea will undoubtedly be firmly controlled in nato's hands, and Russia's strategic space will be seriously squeezed.
In addition, the entry of Sweden and Finland into the treaty will make NATO's layout on the Eastern Front in Europe more "complete". On nato's eastern front, Turkey guards the "Southern Gate" and controls the Mediterranean and Black Sea gateways, so that the U.S. Navy's Sixth Fleet can travel unimpeded in these two areas, and the Russian Black Sea Fleet is in danger of being stuck in the "throat" of the Bosphorus Strait at any time. Nato's "Northern Gate" on the eastern front has long lacked effective control over Russia and cannot "snap its neck" on Russia at critical times. After the entry of The Two Countries into the Treaty, NATO can use the long coastline of the two countries to deploy to Russia, and the Russian Baltic Fleet will always be under NATO's deterrence.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on May 18 that as a NATO member, Turkey would not agree to any NATO expansion that could endanger NATO and Turkey's own security. Xinhua News Agency
Unexpected "roadblocks"
Just when the US-led NATO made a wishful thinking of accepting The Two Countries into the Treaty, Turkey unexpectedly raised objections, causing a huge sensation in the international community.
The Government of Turkey believes that the Governments of Sweden and Finland shield and support the Fedurakh organization and the Kurdistan Workers' Party, which are considered terrorist organizations by the Turkish Government, to carry out activities in their territories that threaten the security of Turkey. According to NATO regulations, the admission of new members needs to be collectively approved by the parliaments of all member states, and if Turkey insists on opposing it, The two countries cannot join NATO.
Turkish Foreign Minister Cavusoglu said on May 15 that Turkey does not oppose NATO expansion, but does not accept NATO support for terrorism. Cavushólu stressed that the Turkish side was unhappy by the fact that the Governments of Sweden and Finland had met with members of the PKK and that Sweden had also provided arms support to the group.
The Turkish government's offer to extradite 33 Fedurah and PKK members to the Swiss-Finnish government was rejected by the two countries, and the contradictions between the two sides quickly intensified. On May 18, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan shouted to the two countries that Turkey would not agree to the entry of two countries that refused to extradite terrorists into NATO, "I heard that [officials from both countries] wanted to come to Turkey, and I told them not to work in vain."
After some mediation between the United States and NATO, the attitude of the parties has softened somewhat. Finnish President Niinistö said that he was open to discussing Finland's accession to NATO in a frank and constructive manner with Turkey; Swedish Prime Minister Anderson told Turkey that he hoped to solve all problems through dialogue. U.S. National Security Adviser Sullivan said Turkey's concerns about Sweden and Finland joining NATO would be resolved. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the security concerns of a key ally like Turkey need to be taken seriously.
On May 22, Erdogan also lowered his tone, no longer mentioning extradition, but making two demands on The Two Countries: one is to stop supporting terrorist organizations such as the PKK; the other is to lift some of the embargo imposed on the Turkish defense industry since Turkey launched a cross-border military operation to combat terrorism.
The entanglement of grievances is not yet to be continued
Turkey's obstruction of joining NATO on the grounds that The Swiss-Finns support terrorist organizations such as the PKK may seem to be well-founded, but in fact it is not feasible and will not receive support from within NATO.
In fact, there are many COUNTRIES IN NATO member states that support PKK. As a leader in NATO, the United States has long supported Kurdish forces in Syria, including the "People's Protection Force" identified by the Turkish government as an offshoot of the PKK. In addition, nato members Norway and the Czech Republic immediately imposed an arms embargo on Turkey after Turkey launched a "fountain of peace" military operation against the PKK across borders. Another NATO member, the Netherlands, has also asked the European Union to impose a larger arms embargo on Turkey.
In addition, turkey's feasibility of preventing The entry of Ruifen and Finland into the treaty is not high. Turkey has been isolated and neglected for a long time within NATO, and if it insists on opposing the entry of the two countries into the treaty, it will itself attract great pressure from other member states, resulting in its isolation in NATO. In fact, it is difficult for Turkey to maintain its opposition.
Why is Turkey doing this? The reasons are basically as follows. On the one hand, it is to vent long-term dissatisfaction with NATO and show its value to NATO. Turkey's relations with a number of NATO countries are tense, the most typical example of which is the long-term discord between Turkey and Greece because of historical and ethnic issues, and the tension between the two countries' warplanes in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Moreover, Turkey suffered losses on the issue of Greece's withdrawal from the treaty and re-entry. In 1974, Turkish troops entered the island to help establish the North Cypriot regime, and Greece withdrew from NATO in protest of NATO's failure to take action to stop Turkey. In 1980, when Greece proposed to re-enter the treaty, Turkey did not prevent it, but it did not bring about the ice release of the two countries, and Greece is still making a trip for Turkey everywhere and resolutely refusing to let Turkey join the European Union. In 2009, Turkey did not object when France returned to NATO's military integration apparatus, but now it has often erupted diplomatic disputes with France. Today, Turkey faces the same situation and does not want to repeat the mistakes of the past. Greece and France's "lack of affection" and "lack of gratitude" are still vividly remembered, and Turkey simply put on a black face and took the opportunity to express its dissatisfaction and demands. Turkey, on the other hand, hopes to reap tangible benefits from NATO, such as lifting its arms embargo and providing more high-tech weapons and equipment.
After this contest between Turkey and NATO, the direction of bilateral relations is worth noting. There are already voices in NATO countries that want to increase sanctions on Turkey in the defense, military, political and diplomatic fields, thereby causing the Turkish lira to accelerate its depreciation, hitting Turkey's national strength, and expelling Turkey from NATO. For years, Turkey's domestic society has also been debating whether to remain in NATO.
For a long time, rifts within NATO have existed, and centrifugal tendencies have been prominent. How the new expansion will affect is still an unfinished drama.
Guangming Daily ( 2022-05-24 09 edition)
Source: Guangming Network - Guangming Daily