AZE.US
Turkey is expanding its room for strategic maneuver and seeking to shape a new security architecture stretching from the Black Sea and the South Caucasus to Central Asia and the Middle East, Turkish political analyst Professor Toghrul Ismail said.
Speaking in an interview with the YouTube channel Geopolitics with Barvinenko, Ismail argued that President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s participation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Bishkek should not be interpreted as an attempt to distance Turkey from NATO or replace its Euro-Atlantic orientation with a Eurasian one.
“Erdoğan is not coming to Bishkek to choose between the West and the East,” Ismail said.
“He wants to demonstrate that Turkey itself is one of the centers of power capable of talking to the West and the East, as well as to Russia, China, Iran and the countries of Central Asia.”
According to the analyst, Turkey remains a NATO member but no longer intends to limit its foreign policy exclusively to the Euro-Atlantic space. The SCO, he said, provides Ankara with another platform for political and economic engagement.
“Turkey no longer wants to be an object of geopolitics. It wants to be a subject that helps shape the rules of the game,” Ismail said.
Russia, Central Asia and the Middle Corridor
The analyst identified dialogue with Russia as one of Erdoğan’s key priorities at the summit. Ankara is interested in discussing the war in Ukraine, Black Sea shipping security, energy and bilateral economic relations directly with Moscow.
Central Asia is another major priority. Turkey does not view the region as a distant periphery but as a strategic space where transportation, energy, trade and links among Turkic states intersect.
The Middle Corridor, which connects Central Asia to Europe through the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan and Turkey, plays a particularly important role in this strategy.
Ismail said the route is no longer merely an economic project. It has become part of a broader geopolitical contest over Eurasian connectivity. Ankara, he added, wants not only to participate in the emerging regional architecture but also to influence how it is built.
Ankara Opposes Excessive Black Sea Militarization
A significant part of the interview focused on the future of the Black Sea region. Ismail acknowledged that Ukraine’s efforts to restrict Russia’s military capabilities are understandable while the war continues. However, he warned that turning the Black Sea into a permanent confrontation zone between Russia and NATO would not create lasting security.
“The militarization of the Black Sea does not necessarily provide Ukraine with a strategic advantage,” he said.
“On the contrary, it could narrow the room for maneuver available to Ukraine and even Turkey.”
According to Ismail, military expansion by one side inevitably produces a response from the other, creating an arms spiral and making the region increasingly unpredictable.
Ankara does not want the Black Sea to become a permanent Russia-NATO front line because that would place Turkey itself on the front line of the confrontation, he said.
For Turkey, the Black Sea is simultaneously a matter of security, trade, energy, transportation and regional stability. Any postwar security architecture should therefore be based not only on military deterrence but also on a balance of interests among the region’s states.
“Russia will not disappear after the war and will remain a Black Sea power,” Ismail said. “Turkey will also remain, as will Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria and Georgia. All of these countries will still have to coexist in the same region.”
He emphasized that coexistence would not mean friendship between Russia and Ukraine or require Kyiv to abandon its national interests. Instead, it would mean recognizing the geographical reality that all regional states will continue to share the Black Sea after the war ends.
Why Turkey Is Building Its Military Power
Commenting on the rapid expansion of Turkey’s defense industry, Ismail rejected the suggestion that Ankara was building its military capabilities in preparation for war against a specific country.
Figures cited during the interview indicated that Turkey is implementing more than 1,600 defense projects worth over $100 billion, while domestically produced systems now account for more than 82% of the country’s defense sector.
Ismail identified three principal reasons for Turkey’s military expansion: strategic autonomy, deterrence and greater regional influence.
Turkey’s previous dependence on foreign suppliers meant that political restrictions or arms embargoes could directly limit its military capabilities. Ankara is now seeking to produce critical systems for its land forces, air force, navy and space program independently.
“A strong military is not needed only to fight wars,” Ismail said. “Sometimes its primary function is precisely to prevent a war from beginning.”
However, the analyst warned that growing military power must not encourage reckless operations. The more capabilities a state possesses, he said, the greater its strategic responsibility becomes.
Turkey’s defense industry is developing into both a national security asset and an instrument of foreign policy across the South Caucasus, Black Sea region, Eastern Mediterranean, Middle East, Balkans and Central Asia.
The goal, according to Ismail, is to give Ankara the ability to decide for itself when and how it should act – and when it should refrain from acting.
A New Regional Defense Format
Ismail also addressed the emerging defense mechanism involving Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
He said the creation of a political and defense committee and a permanent secretariat would represent a shift from a broad political declaration toward an institutional structure.
The analyst cautioned against calling the format an “Islamic NATO.” The North Atlantic alliance has a command system, military infrastructure, decision-making procedures and decades of collective defense experience that the emerging arrangement does not yet possess.
However, its three participants have potentially complementary resources. Turkey has an advanced defense industry, large armed forces and experience in regional operations. Pakistan is a nuclear-armed state with a powerful military, while Saudi Arabia has substantial financial resources and a strategic position in the Persian Gulf.
If Bangladesh, Egypt or other countries eventually join the format, it could become the foundation for a broader security network linking the Middle East and South Asia, Ismail said.
Its primary test would be whether it can develop into an independent center of power without becoming an instrument directed against any particular country.
For Turkey, the larger objective is not to abandon its existing alliances but to broaden its strategic reach.
In Ismail’s assessment, Ankara wants to maintain dialogue with every major center of power while gaining a direct role in shaping the emerging Eurasian order.
AZE.US