‘Chronic dissenters’: Why Türkiye’s growing NATO role is making Israel nervous?

While Türkiye has contributed to various missions – from Somalia to Kosovo, where it leads the alliance’s peace mission – the pro-Israeli lobby in the US and their supporters have been publishing controversial reports in an effort to create an anti-Turkish perception inside the Western alliance. 

“Although Israel is not an official NATO member, the framing of criticisms through the lens of ‘NATO norms’ is perceived as an attempt by an external actor to shape internal debates within the organisation,” says Ozgur Korpe, an academic at the National Defence University.  

“It appears that certain (pro-Israeli) think tanks are trying to redefine NATO’s collective threat hierarchy at the regional level, and that Türkiye’s objections, framed within its own national security priorities, are deliberately presented as ‘intra-Alliance discord’,” Korpe tells TRT World. 

The questioning of Türkiye’s role seems more linked to the multipolar nature of the global system than to its military capacity, he notes, but he also adds that Ankara is no longer a static actor protecting the alliance’s southeastern border, as it was during the Cold War. 

“It is important to remember that those questioning it are not NATO members and are merely a small group of chronic dissenters,” he says, referring to pro-Israeli voices. 

Despite the Israeli propaganda machine, not only Turkish but also Western audiences in different NATO states are increasing their voices against Israel’s genocidal conduct in Gaza and recent settler violence across occupied West Bank villages and towns. 

Spain and, most lately, Italy, two NATO states with EU memberships, have fiercely criticised Israeli atrocities from Gaza to Iran war, says Daricili, pointing out a growing uneasiness in the Western world against Tel Aviv’s violent conduct across the Middle East. 

Analysts point out that the transatlantic military alliance has weathered many troubles in the past and will weather such destabilising acts by Israel as well as differences with the US over defence allocations. 

Despite growing strain between Washington and European capitals, NATO as a whole is expected to respond to Israel’s aggressive posture and Iran war “rationally”, according to Daricili, a former Turkish intelligence officer. 

“Without Turkish participation in NATO, Europe can not have a real security architecture. Israel can not decide the future of NATO.” 

Israel’s expansive policies across the region might have reached its own limits as the country of nine million appears to be exhausted by the wars on multiple fronts, the Turkish academic adds, referring to Iran’s damaging attacks across different Israeli cities. 

Strategic autonomy 

Experts also draw attention to the fact that the Turkish leadership, which is well aware of anti-Turkish Israeli propaganda in the US and other areas, has already adopted a policy of strategic autonomy to ensure its political interests across different regions. 

Besides NATO membership, which provides “a critical leverage” to Ankara, Türkiye’s biggest asset is its own national power base and political and military potential, which demonstrates its impact, from the defence industry to its growing reach across regions ranging from North Africa to Azerbaijan and Pakistan, says Batu.  

While pro-Israeli voices in the US and leading politicians like former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett in the Zionist state are doing their best to undermine Türkiye’s increasing political appeal across the Eurasian geography from Eastern Europe to the Middle East, Caucasia and Central Asia, Ankara has no hesitation to move forward on its path, he adds. 

“Türkiye is likely to respond to Israel’s potential encirclement and isolation strategy by further deepening its strategic autonomy,” says Korpe. 

Ankara is responding with a proactive foreign policy against Israel’s adversary approach and other negative regional equations that might exclude Türkiye, Korpe adds. 

“Türkiye will continue to use its institutional position within NATO and its geopolitical weight as diplomatic leverage to counter such initiatives.”