"If Turkey Picks Fight With Russia, Then NATO To The Rescue?" Topic

I ask because that's where it looks like things are headed in Syria.

So … how would such a thing unfold? What do you think would be the sequence of events leading up to that mess?

Dan

No… There's actually quite a bit of wiggle room… :)

Treaty: link

Pertinent part:

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

IIRC NATO is a defensive treaty. If Turkey is the attacker then I think they're on their own. But if Russia initiates an attack, then Turkey could invoke the treaty. While Turkey is not popular right now with most of us, if NATO does NOT respond to Russian aggression then it invalidates the treaty's effectiveness. So I don't think the Russians would be the agressor, but a mistake on the side of the Turks…

Damon.

I proudly served in Afghanistan(2009 with the 173rd AB) and I can tell you a great deal about those people over there, but then I will be banned.

Nukes would be the very best weapon to use over there.

If Putin gets into a real war with theTurks, I hope he cleans their clock. That would be a good start.

First, they would need to attack actual Russian forces, such as a ship, aircraft, or airbase that has Russian personnel stationed on it. The units that are doing most of the ground fighting for Russia at this time are contractors, so bombing or attacking them wouldn't be enough to trigger the treaty.

My guess is that either way, NATO would debate it to death, involve the UN in talks, etc., until it either blows over or the world moves on to other things. Unless it is full blown air, sea, and ground battles I doubt NATO forces will be committed, and even then, as a last possible resort.

Turkey and Russia will not come to blows. They bent over backwards to avoid conflict the last time when a Turkish F-16 shot down an SU-24 (which resulted in the death of the pilot) over northern Syria. Even when the Russian ambassador to Turkey was assassinated at an art gallery by an anti-Assad loyalist, Putin held back.

The two countries are closer than you might think.

Well, Turkey stopped getting Russian fossil fuels a couple of years ago, right?

Is that when they started getting Syrian oil instead, from a little known group called ISIS? :)

Dan

According to "The Maritime Executive":

Turkey is one of the largest consumers of Russian gas. At present, Russia supplies gas to Turkey via the Blue Stream and Trans-Balkan gas pipelines.

maritime-executive.com/article/second-string-of-turkstream-pipeline-gets-go-ahead#gs.Gefzmfc

This is from an article dated January 22, 2018.

With the current state of things, the conflict between Turkey and Russia is very unlikely, so this is not one of the things we should be afraid of. There's plenty of other things though…

If Russia attacked Turkey directly, and by that I mean inside the countries borders not an attack on forces based elsewhere, then it could cause problems. An actual invasion of the country, even just a large raid, would technically break the "tripwire". How many companies would respond and in what way is a horse of a different colour (Guess who just watched Wizard of Oz with his granddaughter?;-P).

Fatman

The treaty does not really say what you have to do. So maybe sent a medical battalion or a few ships to patrol the Med. might be enough of a response to keep to the letter of the treaty. Much of NATO is a paper tiger anyway, and their ability to project power is even worse. UK and France, USA can project power, but I can't imagine USA sending much direct military aid to Turkey over a Turkey / Russia border dispute.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek
bunkermeister.blogspot.com

"I proudly served in Afghanistan(2009 with the 173rd AB) and I can tell you a great deal about those people over there, but then I will be banned.

Nukes would be the very best weapon to use over there."

It seems like you are pretty openly advocating genocide or "at least" massive war crimes to target a civilian population (not all use of nuclear weapons would be, but saying we should use them because of "those people over there" in counter insurgencies certainly is a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, and its most basic principles of not targeting civilians at that) but you're also using first hand experience with Afghanistan to target Turkey.

They speak languages that aren't related.
They are 2,000 miles away from each other.
Turkey is at the cultural and often political center of empires for millennia.
Afghanistan is often called the graveyard of empires because it has so often been a frontier.

RTJEBADIA: "They speak languages that aren't related.
They are 2,000 miles away from each other.
Turkey is at the cultural and often political center of empires for millennia."

That's not preventing both Erdogan (Sunni) and Assad (Shi'a) from recruiting and training thousands of Afghans for the Syrian mess.

Besides, language and proximity are not the "ring" that brings them all together and in the darkness binds them.

Dan

And Iran too, it seems:

link
link
link

Maybe these are today's version of cheap "Janisaries", taking children/teens from among the immigrants already living and breeding within your borders and using them not as royal guards but as expendable cannon fodder? And if they get killed or captured, just say they are mercenaries and wash your hands of it all. Win-win for Iran.

Dan
PS. This might be a good time for all the infidels (Russia and US) to vacate the highly volatile premises. Either that or end up getting blamed somehow for the next big wave of violence brewing in that area.

"They speak languages that aren't related.
They are 2,000 miles away from each other."

Sounds like the US teams in Syria – although they came from rather more than 2000 miles away…..

That's not preventing both Erdogan (Sunni) and Assad (Shi'a) from recruiting and training thousands of Afghans for the Syrian mess.

I'd like to see a reliable source for the claim that Turkey is training thousands of Afghans for Syria.

Deephorse

Firstly, before I go looking for those links, what would you consider "a reliable source"?

Secondly, of the thousands, Iran has the largest share, because they are "recruited" (drafted?) from among the Shi'a Afghans already living within their borders. These end up helping Assad. Many of these are minors.

Turkey's Afghan recruits are a much smaller number, are Sunni, and end up helping out some of the so-called Free Syrian rebel factions.

Dan

I'm more confused by the relevance of Turkey using proxy militias and foreign fighters in Syria. US does it too. What's the "ring" that binds us? I think it might be something like "great power politics," not religion or ethnicity.

RTJEBADIA: "I'm more confused by the relevance of Turkey using proxy militias and foreign fighters in Syria. "

I don't understand the confusion. If this discussion is about a potential clash between Turkey (for now still a NATO member) and Russia, then Syria is as good a place as any for that to happen, specially with so many players and their proxies on the ground.

Dan

When your two opponents are engaged in a knife fight, it is best to step back and see who gets gutted first.