I wonder what had deal had to be made for him to say this. Also grain of salt till ink is dry.
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
554 points (96.0% liked)
World News
32283 readers
535 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I've seen speculation that Turkey will get F-16s in return.
Looking forward to seeing Orban cornered.
They've had F-16s for years, producing most of them domestically (under license). Maybe some upgrades?
Turkey's been developing their own "5th gen" fighter, and they do have a pretty decent domestic military industrial base, but they got barred from purchasing the F-35 in 2019 when they bought an S-400 system from Russia - I wonder if he wants those. It'd need some US congressional cooperation to make happen, though.
load more comments
(2 replies)
As a swede I am on the fence on wether Sweden should join NATO in the first place, but at least we're not out for the stupidest fucking reason anymore.
What are your counter points? Other than not wanting to be a staging ground for a potential NATO/Russian war?
I think most people who have switched sides, who were originally for/split, would today argue that it's unlikely that Russia would stage another war in the coming years. Looking at how poorly they are performing in Ukraine.
So getting into NATO with the possibility that Erdogan's demands will have an actual effect on the Swedish laws has not been deemed worth it right now.
I also doubt anybody reasonable would consider some of his demands to be achievable, Turkey in EU today?
That's a pretty good assessment. Thanks for the insight.
Worth noting I am partly speaking from my own assessment as well. I want us to join NATO but I don't find it to be an affair that is as urgent anymore and I'd preferably have it done without any greater effects on our justice system or other parts that Erdogan was unhappy about.
However, it's worth noting that there are still a reasonable amount of swedes who are completely against NATO.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Per the NYT, here’s what Sweden and NATO would do in return:
In return, Sweden and Turkey would continue to work bilaterally against terrorism, Sweden would help reinvigorate Turkey’s application to enter the European Union, and NATO would establish a new “special coordinator for counterterrorism,” he said.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/10/world/europe/erdogan-turkey-sweden-nato.html
Turkey had previously spent months blocking Sweden's application, accusing it of hosting Kurdish militants.
Man, fuck Turkey
And fuck Sweden for being cucked by erdogan
With all the requirements stipulated through this agreement it feels more like blackmail than anything. Glad they're finally in, or in the process of getting in, but the whole thing just seems unreal and unfair.
Stop making international organisations you can't kick members out of!
Geez, get your stuff together Western governments.
This is an interesting topic you're talking about here. What If NATO had such a section in their treaties that allowed a country to be kicked. How would that effect the alliance?
One of the key features of an alliance is trust, if you are at risk of getting kicked out, then you might not want to join, or you take it less serious?
There is a pretty interesting video from William Spaniel about this topic here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p_a9QiL-hA
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=5p_a9QiL-hA
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
load more comments
(2 replies)
It sounds like Erdogan is saying this is conditional on the EU reopening talks about Turkiye joining. Is that even happening?
No, that's what he said earlier today. Seems like he was just posturing and seeking attention.
Oh, I see! I misread the article. Good news!
It sounds like it's going through because Sweden and Turkey have worked together to address legitimate concerns about Turkish national security? But I don't see any mention of the EU talks; the article neither dismissing them nor addressing them at all (unless I'm just dumb right now and have mis-read something). So I'm still wondering if those talks are "off the table", or if someone could please correct me about my misunderstandings
Nah. Sweden doesn't seem to have given any firm commitments about security beyond "We work on it together", which can mean exactly as little or as much it fancies Sweden after they are in NATO.
To me this is simply "Erdogan has decided he has seen this bargaining to completion and it would look really bad, if this thing wasn't resolved by Vilnius. Pressure started to mount with This is starting to be embarrassing Recep from rest of NATO" and he simply called it good.
Nothing needs to have been changed on this exact moment, He just decided he has tried long enough and has exhausted the concessions and no point dragging it on. Instead of benefit, it started to be more hindrance in his calculation to keep this going.
He can now tan in the limelight in Vilnius as the leader who saved the situation at last minute. Mind you the problem was of his own creation, but hey those are the best kind of problems. You have exact control and can "solve the problem" at exactly the most suitable last minute moment. Actual problems are harder for "last minute saviour" credibility collection. You might actually fail to solve the problem and thats not good.
Talks weren't suspended because the EU hates Turkey (national politics and sentiment nonwithstanding Berlaymont just doesn't care about those things) but because the accession procedure went nowhere, and in some areas backslided.
As such reopening is contingent on nothing but Turkey actually taking its prospect of joining seriously. I wonder if Erdogan understands that "Sweden reinvigorating Turkey's application" pretty much means Sweden giving Turkey private lessons in how to be less of a shithole... in any case it doesn't surprise me that Sweden agreed to such language.
I saw this from today, mentioning paving the way for Turkey to join the EU, as well as the US selling their F-16's to Turkey.
I think the US congress would veto Biden's approval (or already has), if I'm reading correctly? But I can't find any follow-up as to what actually made the deal go through.
I also wonder if the EU is going to reopen talks about Turkey joining. But seems like Sweden has also done a lot of legwork already to jibe with Turkish security concerns, so maybe that was enough? I'm curious too
EU will never seriously want turkey to be member. They will only pretend if necessary.
EU doesnt want another Orban and Polish right wing governments blocking every single decision
Horribel. Sweden do not need NATO for peace , NATO needs Sweden for war.
Fucking finally
I want to see Putins stupid face now, it must be glorious to watch
"sweden joining NATO does not concern us." - putin replies
Translation: "Sweden joining NATO greatly concerns us."
This isn't happening it's just grandstanding before the summit. Sweden said they'll put in a good word for Turkey to join the EU, Erdogan said he'll put in a good word to Turkish parliament. After the conference someone will do something trivial and they'll fake outrage and go back to Sweden not joining.
I really want to see the price NATO ended up paying …
I guess they just had to sweeden the deal
Initially exciting, and if it happens, this is HUGE.
It is exciting to watch the hands of the dooms day clock inch closer to midnight.
Huh? I'm not sure what your response is about.
I'm surprised. Erdogan is not known for non-confronational decisions, especially if they benefit others. Did he suffer a sudden bout of dementia?
Nah. He is also known for instant turns, when he thinks he has bargained enough or when it happens to suit the image he wants to present.
For example say he decided "Vilnius is the moment I stop bargaining, but only at last minute. Lets see what concessions I can get out of them until then" or so on.
It is exactly on brand for Erdogan to suddenly turn his position and go "what problem, there is no problem. What I said last week there was a problem... no no no, I Erdogan The First have solved problem quickly in only few days. Yes we made a deal, I negotiated amazing deal, deal solves the problem. There is No problem anumore. It's solved."
What happened to solve the problem? Nothing, Erdogan just stopped insisting there was a problem in first place and well some flowery language on top to make it look like it was deal to end the problem and not a climb down to end the problem.
Yeah, this sums it up pretty nicely.
You do also have to remember that a lot of this was around the elections and stoking the flames of a boogeyman (the PKK), so now that they're done and over with it was just a matter of time.
view more: next ›