Scrambling to bolster defence postures, the European Union has focused on strengthening its defence industry, pouring money into domestic production, and lowering barriers to collaboration. While this internal investment is critical, the European Union must also look to allies beyond its borders. And one key partner is hiding in plain sight: Turkey.
In recent days and weeks, reports have been swirling that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is considering a troop contribution to a peacekeeping force in Ukraine. Behind the scenes, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte is already urging deeper cooperation between Turkey and the European Union.
Turkey has not always been an easy ally of the West. Erdoğan has frequently used his country's NATO membership as leverage to extract concessions, delaying coordinated action in Libya in 2011 and holding up Finland and Sweden's accession to the alliance, for example. This transactional approach is unlikely to change. But here's the crucial point: Turkey has largely honoured the deals it has struck. And Turkey lacks the political or economic leverage to simply walk away from agreements.
Moreover, Turkey's core geopolitical interests—and, arguably, its vision for international stability—remain aligned with NATO. Ankara has played a critical role in supporting Ukraine, supplying military aid and upholding the Montreux Convention, which restricts Russian naval movement. Turkey's deep-seated mistrust of Russia, stemming from centuries of conflict and competition, continues to shape its strategic calculations.
Turkey's core geopolitical interests—and, arguably, its vision for international stability—remain aligned with NATO.
Every NATO member contributes something unique, and Turkey is no exception. It offers military mass, a robust defence industry, and diplomatic reach beyond Europe. With NATO's second-largest army, Turkey brings sheer numbers to the alliance, an invaluable factor when defending long frontiers or maintaining a forward presence. While some of its troops are conscripts, making them less battle-ready than professional forces, quantity remains a decisive advantage in modern warfare.
Turkey's defence industry has grown significantly, benefitting from decades of investment and technology transfer. While Turkish equipment, such as the Bayraktar TB2 drone, may not be as technologically advanced as its Western counterparts, it has proven cost-effective and highly effective in combat. Ukraine's battlefield success with Turkish UAVs underscores the value of rugged, easily producible weapons over cutting-edge but scarce alternatives. In an era where rapid resupply is crucial, Turkey's capacity for mass production is a strategic asset.
Beyond its military contributions, Turkey's diplomatic, cultural, and economic ties extend into Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. Unlike its European NATO counterparts, Ankara can engage with regimes that Brussels and Washington may prefer to avoid. Whether securing access to critical minerals, negotiating energy deals, or counterbalancing Russian and Chinese influence, Turkey can serve as NATO's bridge to regions where Western credibility is limited.
Deepening NATO's partnership with Turkey requires a shift in mindset. European leaders must abandon the illusion that Turkey will ever be the Westernised, values-driven ally they wish it to be. Instead, they must engage with the Turkey that exists today. A more transactional relationship, where shared interests take precedence over ideological alignment, is the most realistic approach. Turkey sees itself as an independent power, not a subordinate NATO member, and its leaders will continue to make deals that best serve their own national interests. Instead of resisting this reality, NATO should find ways to leverage it.
Turkey's foreign policy is shaped by a strong desire for strategic autonomy. While this can be frustrating for NATO leaders, it also means Ankara is unlikely to become a Russian puppet. Rather than pressuring Turkey to fall in line, NATO should identify areas where Turkish independence aligns with Western objectives—such as countering Russian influence in the Black Sea and Syria.
Turkey sees itself as an independent power, not a subordinate NATO member, and its leaders will continue to make deals that best serve their own national interests. Instead of resisting this reality, NATO should find ways to leverage it.
One of the biggest obstacles in NATO-Turkey relations is the lingering question of EU membership. No one seriously believes Turkey will join the European Union, yet neither side wants to officially acknowledge this. This uncertainty breeds resentment. Instead of continuing a diplomatic dance that leads nowhere, NATO leaders should acknowledge reality: Turkey's future lies in a close but independent partnership with Europe, much like Switzerland, Norway, or (increasingly) the United Kingdom.
Turkey is not an ideal ally, but in today's geopolitical climate, ideal allies are a luxury NATO cannot afford. Ankara's democratic backsliding, human rights abuses, and flirtations with Russia create undeniable tensions. But Turkey remains a critical player in countering Russian aggression, stabilising Syria, and extending NATO's global reach.
Recent European defence talks, which included Turkish participation, suggest that momentum is building. Now, NATO must seize this opportunity to redefine its relationship with Turkey—not as a reluctant partner, but as an indispensable one.
