Journals / Anadolu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 27 Issue: 2

BETWEEN ALLIANCE AND AUTONOMY: THE EVOLUTION OF SKEPTICISM IN NATO–TÜRKIYE RELATIONS

Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate a clear departure from the cooperative dynamics of the Cold War era, replaced by a phase marked by strategic rivalries and mutual distrust.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the increasing skepticism shaping NATO–Türkiye relations and assesses its consequences for the Alliance’s credibility, cohesion, and capacity to fulfill its collective defense mandate.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Employing a qualitative research approach, the study draws on document analysis of NATO’s official statements, strategic reports, and policy texts concerning Türkiye, alongside discourse analysis of secondary sources, to investigate the conceptual foundations and long-term persistence of this skepticism.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate a clear departure from the cooperative dynamics of the Cold War era, replaced by a phase marked by strategic rivalries and mutual distrust.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:NATO · Alliance · Skepticism

Abstract

This study examines the increasing skepticism shaping NATO–Türkiye relations and assesses its consequences for the Alliance’s credibility, cohesion, and capacity to fulfill its collective defense mandate. It contends that geopolitical tensions, identity-based differences, and the proliferation of disinformation have fundamentally reshaped alliance politics. Employing a qualitative research approach, the study draws on document analysis of NATO’s official statements, strategic reports, and policy texts concerning Türkiye, alongside discourse analysis of secondary sources, to investigate the conceptual foundations and long-term persistence of this skepticism. The findings indicate a clear departure from the cooperative dynamics of the Cold War era, replaced by a phase marked by strategic rivalries and mutual distrust. Divergent threat perceptions, disagreements over NATO’s relations with the European Union, and disputes surrounding the Alliance’s enlargement policies have transformed skepticism into an entrenched institutional feature. Türkiye’s unilateral military operations in Syria and its defense partnerships with non-NATO actors have further eroded trust, weakening the collective understanding of shared security principles. Although NATO’s primary mission remains to build solidarity and mutual trust among its members, growing normative and operational disagreements with Türkiye continue to strain the Alliance’s internal cohesion. The research highlights the need to re-evaluate defense strategies, particularly regarding reliability, alliance unity, and operational coordination. Framing the analysis within geopolitical, normative, and institutional contexts, this study offers a nuanced understanding of the evolving dynamics of alliance politics in the 21st century.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özdemir, G. (2026). BETWEEN ALLIANCE AND AUTONOMY: THE EVOLUTION OF SKEPTICISM IN NATO–TÜRKIYE RELATIONS. Anadolu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Volume: 27 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.53443/anadoluibfd.1730124

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (64)

  1. Açıkmeşe, S., & Aksu, F. (2024). Türkiye’s relations with/within NATO: The ontological security dilemmas of Türkiye’s transatlantic identity. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 50(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/03043754241297762
  2. Akyesilmen, N., Tinker, V., & Ishmeal, M. (2020). Turkey-US relations in the context of the Syrian conflict: From cooperation to confrontation. Przegląd Strategiczny, 13, 79–96. https://doi.org/10.14746/ps.2020.1.5
  3. Aslan, A. (2024). Strategic autonomy in Turkish foreign policy: Defense or offense? Comparative Strategy, 43(6), 749–780. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2024.2409049
  4. Athanassopoulou, E. (1999). Turkey–Anglo-American security interests, 1945–1952: The first enlargement of NATO (1st ed.). Routledge.
  5. Bakır, A. (2023). Turkey’s security role in the Gulf region: Exploring the case of a newcomer. Turkish Studies, 24(5), 809–831. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2023.2182686
  6. Balcı, M. (2018). The depth of Turkish-NATO defense cooperation. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(2), 884–897. https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.411300
  7. Bhattacharji, S. (2010). Inception of skepticism in vedic literature. In G. Fløistad (Ed.), Philosophy of religion: Contemporary philosophy: A new survey (pp. 193–214). Springer.
  8. Bölme, S. (2022). NATO-Türkiye relations: From irreplaceable partner to questionable ally. Studia Europejskie – Studies in European Affairs, 26(3), 93–116. https://doi.org/10.33067/SE.3.2022.5
  9. Can, M. (2021). Is NATO brain dead?: Turkey’s position and the effects of patronal politics on foreign policy. In NATO and the future of European and Asian security (pp. 16–32). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-7118-7.ch002
  10. Clancy, L., Poushter, J., & Hernandez Ramones, S. (2024, October 16). How people in Turkey view international affairs. Pew Research Center. Retrieved April 22, 2025, from https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/10/16/how-people-in-turkey-view-international-affairs/
  11. Coliva, A., & Pritchard, D. (2022). Skepticism. Routledge.
  12. Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights. (2021). Report on the human rights situation in Turkey. Retrieved February 12, 2025, from https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/turkey
  13. Council of Europe. (2020). Monitoring of human rights in Turkey. Retrieved January 11, 2025, from https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/country-monitoring/turkey
  14. Çakır, M. F. (2024). Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, Orta Doğu’nun savunulması ve Türkiye: 1946–1952. Liberal Düşünce, 113, 193–211. https://doi.org/10.36484/liberal.1438746
  15. Çınar, Ö. H., & Şirin, T. (2017). Turkey’s human rights agenda. Research and Policy on Turkey, 2(2), 33–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/23760818.2017.1350354
  16. Dagi, I. (2001). Human rights and democratization: Turkish politics in the European context. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 1(3), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683850108454652
  17. Dagi, I. (2005). Transformation of Islamic political identity in Turkey. Turkish Studies, 6(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/1468384042000339302
  18. Demirsu, I. (2017). Dark past, turbulent future: The changing course of security policies and the status of human rights in Turkey. In Counter-terrorism and the prospects of human rights (pp. 99–129). Palgrave Macmillan.
  19. Didic, A., & Kösebalaban, H. (2019). Turkey’s rapprochement with Russia: Assertive bandwagoning. The International Spectator, 54(3), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2019.1627070
  20. Dursun-Ozkanca, O. (2019). Turkey–west relations: The politics of intra-alliance opposition. International Affairs, 97(4), 1263–1265. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiab100
  21. Düzgit, S. A., & Keyman, E. F. (2025). Strategic autonomy in Turkish foreign policy in an age of multipolarity: Lineages and contradictions of an idea. International Politics, 63, 184-205. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-024-00638-w
  22. Erhan, Ç. (2021). Autonomy in arms: Turkey’s weapons procurement and the S-400 missile system. TRT World Research Centre. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348624545_Autonomy_in_Arms_Turkey%27s_Weapons_Procurement_and_the_S-400_Missile_System_POLICY_OUTLOOK
  23. European Commission. (2022). Turkey 2022 report. https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/turkey-report-2022_en
  24. Glaser, C. L. (1997). The security dilemma revisited. World Politics, 50(1), 171–201. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25054031
  25. Grigoriadis, I. N., & Aras, Ü. E. (2023). Distrusted partnership: Unpacking anti-Americanism in Turkey. Middle East Policy, 30(1), 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/mepo.12674
  26. Güvenç, S., & Özel, S. (2012). NATO and Turkey in the post-Cold War world: Between abandonment and entrapment. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 12(4), 533–553. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2012.741845
  27. Harris, G. S. (1975). Restricted access: Turkey and the United States. In K. H. Karpat (Ed.), Turkey’s foreign policy in transition: 1950–1974 (pp. 51–72). Brill.
  28. Hintz, L., & Banks, D. E. (2022). Symbolic amplification and suboptimal weapons procurement: Explaining Turkey’s S-400 program. Security Studies, 31(5), 826–856. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2022.2153733
  29. Jervis, R. (1978). Cooperation under the security dilemma. World Politics, 30(2), 167–214. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2009958
  30. Kibaroğlu, M. (2019). On Turkey’s missile defense strategy: The four faces of the S-400 deal between Turkey and Russia. PERCEPTIONS: Journal of International Affairs, 24(2), 159–174.
  31. Kirişci, K. (2017). Turkey and the West: Fault lines in a troubled alliance. Brookings Institution Press.
  32. Kınacıoğlu, M. (2017). NATO-Turkey relations: From collective defence to collective security. In P. Gözen Ercan (Ed.), Turkish foreign policy (pp. 83–103). Palgrave Macmillan.
  33. Kuniholm, B. (2001). The evolving strategic significance of Turkey’s relationship with NATO. In G. Schmith (Ed.), The history of NATO: The first fifty years (pp. 339–357). Palgrave Macmillan.
  34. Kutlay, M., & Öniş, Z. (2021). Turkish foreign policy in a post-western order: Strategic autonomy or new forms of dependence? International Affairs, 97, 1085–1104. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiab094
  35. Lin, C. (2016). A new Eurasian embrace: Turkey pivots east while China marches west. In N. Horesh (Ed.), Toward well-oiled relations? (pp. 30–47). Palgrave Macmillan.
  36. NATO. (1949). The North Atlantic Treaty. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm
  37. NATO. (2018). Brussels summit declaration. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_156624.htm
  38. NATO. (2022). NATO 2022 strategic concept. https://www.nato.int/strategic-concept
  39. NATO. (2022). Madrid summit declaration. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_196951.htm
  40. NATO. (2023). Vilnius summit declaration. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_217320.htm
  41. Oğuzlu, T. (2012). Turkey’s eroding commitment to NATO: From identity to interests. Washington Quarterly, 35(3), 153–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2012.706578
  42. Outzen, R. (2014, June 2). Turkey’s commitment to NATO: Not yet grounds for divorce. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/turkeys-commitment-nato-not-yet-grounds-divorce
  43. Parmeter, I. (2023). Strategic ambiguity: Turkey, Russia and the War in Ukraine. Australian and New Zealand Journal of European Studies, 15(2), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.30722/anzjes.vol15.iss2.17975
  44. Pesu, M., & Sinkkonen, V. (2023). Trans-Atlantic (mis)trust in perspective: Asymmetry, abandonment and alliance cohesion. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 37(2), 206–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2023.2225650
  45. Poushter, J., & Fagan, M. (2021, June 10). NATO continues to be seen in a favorable light by many around the world. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2021/06/10/nato-continues-to-be-seen-in-a-favorable-light/
  46. Rathbun, B. C. (2007). Uncertain about uncertainty: Understanding the multiple meanings of a crucial concept in international relations theory. International Studies Quarterly, 51(3), 533–557. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4621727
  47. Robins, P. (2007). The opium crisis and the Iraq War: Historical parallels in Turkey-US relations. Mediterranean Politics, 12(1), 17–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/13629390601136806
  48. Rose, G. (1998). Neoclassical realism and theories of foreign policy. World Politics, 51(1), 144–172. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25054068
  49. Roberts, P. (2019, August 15). Turkey, the US, and the S-400: A counter-narrative. Royal United Services Institute. https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/turkey-us-and-s-400-counter-narrative
  50. Rumelili, B. (2015). Identity and desecuritisation: The pitfalls of conflating ontological and physical security. Journal of International Relations and Development, 18, 52–74. https://doi.org/10.1057/jird.2013.22
  51. Rumford, C. (2002). Failing the EU test? Turkey’s national programme, EU candidature and the complexities of democratic reform. Mediterranean Politics, 7(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/713604551
  52. Saragih, H. M. (2023). Turkish-Russian cooperation in procurement S-400 TRIUMF missile system 2019. International Journal of Social Science, 3(2), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.190835
  53. Sayarı, S. (2000). Turkish foreign policy in the post-cold war era: The challenges of multi-regionalism. Journal of International Affairs, 54(1), 169–182. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24357694
  54. Schvachová, D., & Vojtek, J. (2024). Turkey’s trust in the USA: Causes of the criticised alliance member’s approach. Vojenské Rozhledy, 33(2), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.3849/2336-2995.33.2024.02.003-017
  55. Shlykov, P. (2023). The state of strategic hedging: Turkey’s foreign policy and relations with Russia. Russia in Global Affairs. https://eng.globalaffairs.ru/articles/the-state-of-strategic-hedging/
  56. Turkish Minute. (2024, March 15). Most Turks think NATO membership is important for dealing with security challenges: Survey. https://turkishminute.com/2024/03/15/most-turk-think-nato-membership-is-important-for-dealing-with-security-challenges-survey/
  57. Turkish Minute. (2025, February 19). 38 pct of Turks view NATO unfavorably despite key military role, survey shows. https://www.turkishminute.com/2025/02/19/38-pct-of-turks-view-nato-unfavorably-despite-key-military-role-survey-shows6/
  58. Türkiye Raporu. (2023). Türkiye'de NATO'ya bakış [Kamuoyu anket raporu]. https://www.Türkiyeraporu.com
  59. Turgut, H. B., & Çakır, A. (2023). ‘Türkiye’yi NATO’dan hemen çıkarın’: ABD kamuoyunda Türkiye karşıtı söylemin inşası. Kastamonu İletişim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10, 20–48. https://doi.org/10.56676/kiad.1252485
  60. Vamvakas, P. (2012). Turkey’s ISAF mission: A maverick with strategic depth. In N. Hynek & P. Marton (Eds.), Statebuilding in Afghanistan: Multinational contributions to reconstruction (pp. 251–268). Routledge.
  61. Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Addison-Wesley.
  62. Warhola, J. W., & Mitchell, W. A. (2006). The warming of Turkish-Russian relations: Motives and implications. Demokratizatsiya, 14(1), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.3200/DEMO.14.1.127-143
  63. Yegin, M. (2019, June 28). Turkey between NATO and Russia: The failed balance (SWP Comment 2019/C 30). Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik. https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2019C30/
  64. Yılmaz, H. (2011). Euroscepticism in Turkey: Parties, elites, and public opinion. South European Society and Politics, 16(1), 185–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/13608741003594353