The leader of the Turkic world, Turkey, a middle power, views the Ukraine-Russia conflict as an experimental case to test whether it can act independently of Russia and the West while shaping significant geopolitical outcomes.

On the chessboard of power struggles in the Middle East and Eurasia, Turkey has mastered the strategy of dual-front warfare – excelling in the Middle Eastern battlefield while showcasing its prowess in Eurasia. This dual approach is not only a response to contemporary geopolitics but also a statecraft refined over centuries of conflicts, diplomatic games, and imperial ambitions. For Ankara, going it alone is not its survival strategy – the country's existence and influence depend on continuous political maneuvering, maintaining a delicate balance between regional aspirations and global realities.

This delicate balance is particularly evident in Turkey's relationship with Russia – a complex and confrontational one throughout history. For centuries, Ankara's strategic goal has remained consistent: to contain Russian expansion – not just eastward, but especially southward, as this directly threatens Turkey's sphere of influence. From the Russo-Turkish wars from the 16th to the 20th century to Stalin's proposal in 1945 for control of the Turkish straits, Moscow's ambitions have repeatedly tested Turkey's will. Although the Cold War placed direct military confrontation under NATO's security umbrella, this deep-seated power struggle never truly subsided.

Throughout much of the 20th century, Turkey played a passive role, constrained by domestic disputes and Cold War realities, forced to rely on Western security guarantees. However, today's Ankara is no longer a mere buffer state – this rising power is actively shaping the regional landscape in its own way. This transformation is most evident in Turkey's response to the war in Ukraine: leveraging strategic advantages to challenge Russia, demonstrating an independent stance, and redefining its role on the international stage.

To this day, Turkey continues to employ classic strategies for conflict de-escalation – maintaining economic ties with Russia while arming Ukraine, enforcing the Montreux Convention, and mediating diplomatic agreements. This balancing act is the essence of Turkey's statecraft: neither fully committing nor completely disengaging, ensuring that no single power can unilaterally dictate the terms of negotiations.

Turkey's strategy toward Ukraine is based on a series of carefully calculated strategic considerations. Just as Ankara has long sought to curb Russian influence in its vicinity, it also sees Ukraine as a crucial component of this broader balancing act.

Containing Russia's hegemony in the Black Sea remains a top priority, and a strong Ukraine effectively counterbalances Russian expansion. This move would strengthen Turkey's strategic influence in the region and enhance NATO's overall strength. Strengthening its military-industrial base is another core objective; through deepening defense and economic cooperation with Kyiv, Turkey's military autonomy and technological capabilities will see significant improvement.

At the same time, Turkey positions itself as a key mediator, maintaining open communication channels with both Kyiv and Moscow to preserve strategic flexibility while maximizing regional influence. Beyond these immediate concerns, Turkey sees this war as an opportunity to expand its energy security – by diversifying energy supply routes, reducing dependence on Russia, especially by deepening cooperation with alternative energy suppliers in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Moreover, Turkey's involvement in Ukraine is not just about military and economic strategy, but also about achieving its broader geopolitical goals. This war gives Turkey more leverage within NATO and the EU, as Turkey seeks to push Western allies to make more diplomatic and economic concessions. At the same time, the country's influence among post-Soviet states, especially Turkic countries, continues to grow, gradually expanding its political and economic influence to counterbalance Russia's.

Turkey views its broader regional actions as part of its strategic objectives – the country sees this conflict as a test of its ability to act independently of both Russia and the West while shaping significant geopolitical landscapes.

One of Turkey's most notable moves has been its public support for Ukraine's accession to NATO. This position is not empty rhetoric, but rather a long-term strategy to create a balance against Russia. For Ankara, a strong and independent Ukraine would effectively contain Russian expansion in the Black Sea, which not only consolidates Turkey's historical mission of containing the Russian navy in the Near East, but also demonstrates its firm support for Ukraine.

This stance has aligned Turkey with a growing group of European nations – especially Poland and Eastern European countries – which view Ukraine and Turkey as key forces in countering Russian aggression. Poland, in particular, has become a staunch supporter of Turkey's deep integration into the European security system, believing that Turkey's strategic involvement can effectively strengthen the defense of NATO's southeastern flank.

Differing from most European countries, Turkey does not merely resist Russia through diplomatic means or supplying weapons to Ukraine; instead, it actively challenges Russian influence across multiple fronts where Western powers have significantly withdrawn. From Syria, Libya, to the Caucasus and Central Asia, Ankara competes with Moscow for regional dominance, often using military, economic, and diplomatic means to counterbalance Russian expansionist ambitions. This makes Turkey's role in the Ukraine war a key piece in a larger geopolitical game – it aims to establish itself as a key power broker in multiple regions, rather than simply following the order dictated by either the West or Russia.

For the West, Turkey's advantage is severely underestimated. Turkey's resistance to Russia's hybrid warfare makes it a valuable asset in countering Moscow's influence. NATO and the EU should not distance themselves from Ankara but recognize its strategic value.

For the West, this is a high-risk game: if they do not take Turkey seriously, it could lead to a geopolitical vacuum, which Moscow will seize upon. If Turkey is marginalized, it will not become a Russian ally, but will act according to its own logic – making deals with Moscow when beneficial, while creating problems for the Western security framework.

This is a highly strategic gift for the Kremlin. Whenever Ankara and the West face differences, Russia can seize the opportunity – whether in energy, defense, or regional influence. Isolating Turkey will not contain the threat but will amplify tensions, weaken NATO's stance, and increase Russia's leverage in exploiting the divide.

The issue is not whether Turkey is a difficult partner – it always has been. The key question is whether distancing itself will make Europe safer. At present, it clearly will not.

Source: The National Interest

Author: Zineb Riboua

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7564834056051917318/

Disclaimer: The article represents the views of the author and reader, and you are welcome to express your opinion via the [Upvote/Downvote] buttons below.