Türkiye to Press Allies for Access to EU Defense Funds
In written answers to questions from Reuters, Guler also said Türkiye hopes a potential meeting between Donald Trump and Tayyip Erdogan will finally yield progress in lifting US sanctions that expelled Türkiye from the F-35 jet program.
Guler said Türkiye , which has the second biggest army in NATO after the United States, has advanced capabilities in areas such as drones, which would be valuable to its allies as they plan major new spending on defense.
"Allies need to spend not only more, but also smarter – and there is a need for more cooperation than ever before," Guler said when asked about Trump's call on the alliance to ramp up defense spending to target 5% of output.
Many European nations have announced plans for major increases in defense spending. The EU itself, driven by fears of a Russian attack and doubts about US security commitments, has approved creating a 150 billion-euro ($170 billion) EU arms fund to boost the defense industry, labelled the SAFE scheme.
But it mandates that 65% of projects are funded by firms in the bloc, the broader European Economic Area, or Ukraine.
Guler said such restrictions would exclude non-EU countries like Türkiye from Europe's defense and security architecture, which he said was "an issue that cannot be discussed only within the EU".
Türkiye wants to "build the security of the future together" with the EU, and would continue to work with "open-minded and visionary European allies within or outside SAFE," he said, specifically listing drones, air defenses, naval systems, armoured vehicles and land platforms, electronic warfare and radar systems, ammunition and rocket systems.
Greece, Türkiye's longstanding adversary, has demanded Ankara lift a lift a 30-year old war threat over territorial waters to be permitted to access EU defense funds. Guler said such demands were a mistake, amounting to "involving multilateral platforms in bilateral disputes".
Ankara's defense cooperation with its NATO allies has been hampered in recent years by US sanctions imposed over a Turkish decision to buy Russian S-400 air defense systems, which resulted in Türkiye's expulsion from the US-led F-35 program as both a buyer and manufacturer of the advanced jets.
Erdogan has expressed confidence that Trump, with whom he has good personal ties, will find a solution that relieves Türkiye's defense industry of the sanctions.
A potential meeting between Erdogan and Trump, and the close ties between them, can "breathe new life" into bilateral defense ties and help lift the sanctions, Guler said. Although Ankara would not give up the S-400s, lifting the sanctions would let it consider returning to the F-35 project, he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leaders
37 minutes ago
- Leaders
When Will Arabs Form Deterrent Force to Protect Themselves?
By: Dr. Atef Al-Shabrawy International Expert in Development and Social Economy In 1966, the classic theorist Thomas Schelling introduced a novel concept at the time: 'deterrence.' After World War II, military strategy shifted away from what was known as 'military victory' and began to rely on the art of coercion, intimidation, and deterrence. Schelling argued that the ability to inflict harm on another state is a threatening factor that influences the behavior of that state, compelling it to refrain from aggressive actions. In response to a question from French television in 1974 about whether Iran planned to acquire nuclear weapons, the Shah of Iran cleverly replied, 'My country has signed a non-proliferation treaty. If we trust the major nuclear powers because they are responsible, we wonder: what would happen if there were a 'frivolous' state in the region seeking to acquire such weapons, and who would it attack?' The Concept of Deterrence This approach was echoed by France in the same year when it announced its possession of what President de Gaulle termed 'nuclear deterrence.' This weapon was developed independently by France to avoid reliance on the United States, allowing it to leave NATO. De Gaulle himself, using similar justifications, provided Israel with nuclear weapons under the pretext of protecting it from the Arab threat. In a jab at President Nasser for supporting the Algerian revolution, French diplomat Stéphane Hessel wrote in his memoirs in 2011: 'Helping Israel acquire nuclear weapons is a mandatory task; we created Israel, and we must protect it from a dangerous Arab world that opposes it.' Nuclear Experiments Researcher Dominique Schnapper noted in her 2021 book 'De Gaulle in the Eyes of the Jews' that between 1960 and 1966, France conducted dozens of nuclear tests, some of which were attended by Israeli experts. Consequently, Israel did not need to conduct its own nuclear tests, as France shared the results of its experiments, effectively granting Israel entry into the nuclear club. Mordechai Vanunu Exposes Israel Despite this, Israel continued to deny possessing nuclear weapons until its project engineer, Mordechai Vanunu, leaked classified information and photographs from the Dimona reactor to the British press in 1986, revealing the 'Israeli nuclear ambiguity' that had persisted for decades. Israeli-Iranian Bombardment During the 12 days of mutual Israeli-Iranian bombardment, it became evident that the struggle for control over the Middle East and its resources involves preventing certain countries from acquiring any deterrent capabilities, monitoring and stifling their attempts, and even destroying them. Iraq was destroyed under the pretext of possessing fictitious weapons of mass destruction, and similar arguments were used against Iran, as if nuclear weapons were the exclusive domain of major powers and their allies. In May 1998, India announced that it had become a nuclear power following secret tests that went undetected by American satellites. Shortly thereafter, its historical rival, Pakistan, declared its entry into the nuclear club, becoming the only Muslim nation to achieve this feat while the major powers were distracted. Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of the Pakistani bomb, conducted tests in the Baluchistan mountains before being arrested for allegedly assisting Iran, Libya, and North Korea in developing nuclear technology. He was forced to make a televised apology but remained under house arrest until his death in 2021. Ballistic Missiles The intense Iranian bombardment of Israel highlighted the fact that nuclear technology is not the only deterrent weapon; ballistic and hypersonic missiles can also serve as strategic deterrents. The world witnessed their use in Iranian attacks on Israeli cities, which caused global panic and compelled major powers to intervene. These missiles effectively deterred and broke the aggressor, and the brief conflict, which aimed to divert attention from the ethnic cleansing in Gaza, appeared to be a test of weapons and technologies in preparation for a larger battle whose participants we do not yet know, but we do know its location. Extreme Democracy With the cessation of bombardment, a new dimension of nuclear and strategic deterrence emerged, particularly for Arab nations in the region. The alarming increase in economic exchanges and investments between regional countries and the West seems to have provided us with no negotiating advantage or satisfaction regarding our positions and orientations. It has not erased the cultural and ideological divisions among us, nor the greed for our resources. There is now a tangible threat from the 'Western democracy' that once brought forth Hitler as a symbol of the extremism produced by the ballot box. Recently, 'democratic' extremist leaders have emerged in the United States, Israel, and most European countries, with increasing possibilities of future leadership that may be even more extreme and violent, potentially unleashing bloodier wars. NATO has decided to raise member contributions to military spending from 2% to 5% of GDP by 2035. Enormous Military Budgets It is worth imagining that the 32 NATO countries do not spend more on defense than they do on healthcare or education. Nevertheless, adopting a 5% contribution means these countries will allocate more to their militaries than to education. These enormous budgets could become a more aggressive and extreme force, potentially turning against any friendly nations. The Future of Arabs The future of Arabs is now at the mercy of existential threats that require us all to form an independent intellectual, scientific, and material force, seeking a 'entity' that achieves the strategic deterrence necessary to prevent future generations from suffering and being destroyed by a new right-wing extremist. I recall the words of Saudi writer Othman Al-Omeir: 'We are heading into the future with the people of the future.' I doubt that the 'people of the future' he referred to will take us along with them, given our weaknesses. It is perhaps better to say: 'We are heading into the future with our strength; for strength secures us a place among the people of the future.' Short link : Post Views: 3
Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
The unfinished business in the Balkans
This year marks the 30th anniversary of the Dayton Peace Agreement, which ended the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina that dominated headlines in the first half of the 1990s. Three decades later, the Balkans, located in southeastern Europe, remains the primary area of unfinished business for Euro-Atlantic integration. While some countries in the region have joined major Western institutions such as the EU and NATO, others remain outside the fold. Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo are not part of either the EU or NATO. Meanwhile, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Albania are NATO members, but are still waiting on EU membership. In recent years, little progress has been made in advancing their accession prospects. As a result, the region continues to represent a source of instability not just for Europe, but also for the broader transatlantic community. Apart from Ukraine, no other region poses a more persistent geopolitical challenge for Europe. This is not just a European problem. Following the violent wars of the 1990s that accompanied the breakup of Yugoslavia, the US played a decisive role in helping stabilize the Balkans — through peacekeeping forces, sustained diplomatic engagement, and eventually the Dayton Agreement itself. At the time, Washington recognized that instability in the Balkans could quickly spiral into broader conflict. Today, however, both the US and Europe appear unwilling — or perhaps unable — to engage seriously in the region. The lack of strategic attention has created a vacuum. This should be cause for concern. Much of Europe's instability over the past century has originated in the Balkans. The First World War began with an assassination in Sarajevo. In the early years of the Second World War, the region played a pivotal role as Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy competed for influence. And in the 1990s, ethnic and religious violence killed hundreds of thousands, many of them civilians, across Bosnia, Croatia, and Kosovo. Unfortunately, the challenges in the region are far from resolved. Today, Serbia arguably presents the greatest destabilizing potential in the region. Serbian leaders, especially President Aleksandar Vucic, often invoke the idea of a 'Serbian world.' This concept suggests that ethnic Serbs living outside Serbia's modern borders, such as in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Montenegro, deserve a special status or even direct protection from Belgrade. This mindset has dangerous implications for the region's fragile peace. Bosnia and Herzegovina, with its complex internal structure and the Serb-dominated entity of Republika Srpska, are particularly vulnerable. Kosovo, too, continues to face periodic flare-ups. Montenegro, though more stable, has seen political turmoil in recent years that sometimes taps into the same ethnic divisions. The 30th anniversary of the Dayton Agreement should be a moment for reflection, but also for renewed commitment. Luke Coffey Serbia's assertiveness has also opened the door to increased involvement by Russia and China. Beijing's role is largely economic, focused on infrastructure and energy. Moscow has actively exploited ethnic tensions and political divisions to distract Western policymakers and prevent further Euro-Atlantic integration. One of the reasons the Balkans remain such a challenge is the lack of credible, sustained effort by NATO and the EU to bring the remaining countries into the Euro-Atlantic community. After years — sometimes decades — of vague promises about eventual membership, public frustration is mounting. This creates fertile ground for disinformation, resentment, and foreign meddling. It is time for the West to re-engage meaningfully in the Balkans. NATO and the EU should craft clear strategies and realistic roadmaps for eventual accession tailored to each country's unique circumstances. Policymakers must restore credibility to the idea that integration is possible, not merely aspirational. And whether or not President Donald Trump likes it, the US will have a role to play — as it has since the 1990s. In fact, his first administration made modest but real progress in the region. One major accomplishment was brokering the partial normalization agreement between Serbia and Kosovo under the so-called Washington Agreement in 2020. Another significant achievement was the resolution of the long-standing name dispute between Greece and North Macedonia, paving the way for the latter's accession to NATO. This, combined with Montenegro's NATO membership in 2017, marked a major expansion of the alliance in the Western Balkans during Trump's first term — one that enhanced regional security and reduced space for Russian influence. Trump, now back in the Oval Office, has made global diplomacy a core theme of his second term. He has shown interest in brokering ceasefires and peace deals in conflicts from Southeast Asia to Central Africa. The Balkans should be on that list. There is no reason why the US, working with European allies, cannot convene a new round of high-level diplomacy aimed at resolving some of the region's most pressing disputes, especially between Serbia and Kosovo, and within Bosnia and Herzegovina. The 30th anniversary of the Dayton Agreement should be a moment for reflection, but also for renewed commitment. The success of Dayton was never supposed to be the end of the story. It was meant to be the beginning of a longer process of political normalization, economic development, and Euro-Atlantic integration. Sadly, that process has stalled. But it is not too late to finish the job. As Washington, Brussels, and London remain understandably focused on Ukraine, they must not ignore another part of Europe with a long history of instability — and vast untapped potential. A stable, secure, and integrated Balkans would strengthen the entire Euro-Atlantic community. It would also send a powerful message to adversaries that Europe is united, resilient, and committed to completing the work it began 30 years ago in Dayton.
Asharq Al-Awsat
6 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
How Moscow Might Respond if Trump Stops Russian Oil to India
US President Donald Trump's demand on India to halt Russian oil imports could threaten billions in Russian revenues, prompt Moscow to retaliate by stopping a major US-led oil pipeline and potentially lead to a new global supply crisis. India, the world's third largest oil importer, has become the biggest buyer of Russian oil since 2022, purchasing up to 2 million barrels per day of oil accounting for 2% of global supply. Other top buyers are China and Türkiye. The Indian route is so important for the Kremlin that if disrupted it could prompt it to retaliate by closing the CPC pipeline from Kazakhstan, where US oil majors Chevron and Exxon hold big stakes, analysts at JP Morgan said this week. "Russia is not without leverage," the US bank said. Trump has threatened to slap tariffs of up to 100% on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a peace deal with Ukraine by August 7-9. A 25% tariff on all US goods imports from India starts on Friday. Reuters reported on Thursday that Indian state refineries had paused purchases of Russian oil this week amid Trump's threats. REALIGNMENT India only began buying large quantities of oil from Russia, the world's second largest oil exporter, since 2022. It became a top importer after Europe, Russia's former top client, imposed a ban on Russian oil over its military actions in Ukraine. Russia's oil giant Rosneft has a major stake in one of India's biggest oil refineries. India is now 35% reliant on Russian oil imports worth $50.2 billion in the 2024-25 fiscal year, according to India's government data. "Cutting off this flow would require a massive realignment of trade flows," said Aldo Spanjer from BNP Paribas, adding that the global supply was already stretched. India buys all varieties and grades of Russian oil - including Urals from Western ports, ESPO and Sokol from the Pacific and some grades from the Arctic, according to LSEG data. Urals would be hit hardest if India stops buying as it purchases up to 70% of Russia's biggest export grade by volume. India's oil minister said the country can find alternative supply. India would need to raise imports of US and Middle Eastern crude or cut refining runs, leading to a spike in diesel prices, especially in Europe, which imports fuel from India. "Indian refiners will still struggle to replace the heavy quality of Russian crude so they may end up paring runs," said Neil Crosby from Sparta Commodities. FALLING INCOME Russia has managed to continue selling oil since 2022 despite international sanctions, although it sells it at discounts to global prices. Falling global prices mean Russia's income is already under pressure. Its oil and gas revenue fell 33.7% year-on-year in June to its lowest since January 2023, finance ministry data showed. Revenues will fall 37% in July due to weaker global oil prices and a strong rouble, Reuters calculations show. Russian firms will need to store oil on tankers if India stops buying, paying extra money for shipping charges and being forced to offer wide discounts to new buyers, traders said. A loss of 2 million bpd of exports might also gradually prompt Russia to start reducing oil production from the current levels of 9 million bpd, traders said. Russia's current production is regulated by OPEC+ quotas. HOW CAN RUSSIA RESPOND? Russia could potentially divert some 0.8 million bpd of oil to Egypt, Malaysia, Pakistan, Peru, Brunei, South Africa and Indonesia, JP Morgan said. Moscow could also disrupt the CPC pipeline to make sure the West feels the pain from higher oil prices. Western oil firms Exxon, Chevron, Shell, ENI and TotalEnergies ship up to 1 million bpd via CPC, which has total capacity of 1.7 million bpd. "If we get a visible and substantial difficulty in clearing Russian crude and Putin shuts off CPC, oil prices might get well over $80 per barrel, possibly a lot more," said Crosby. The CPC pipeline crosses Russian territory and the consortium has clashed with Moscow, which ordered it to suspend operations for several days in 2022 and 2025 citing environmental and tanker regulations. A combined stoppage of CPC and Russian flows to India would create a disruption of 3.5 million bpd or 3.5% of global supply. "The Trump administration, like its predecessors, will likely find sanctioning the world's second-largest oil exporter unfeasible without spiking oil prices," JP Morgan said.
