Not all NATO member states are happy with potential new members of the military bloc. In particular, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has once again stated that Ankara will not support the idea of accepting Finland and Sweden into NATO. Turkey blocked the evaluation process of their applications.
Erdogan justifies Ankara’s stance by “acting in these Scandinavian countries” by representatives of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which is recognized as a terrorist organization in Turkey. In particular, the Turkish leader drew attention to the fact that these countries refused to extradite those whom Ankara deems terrorists and imposed sanctions on Turkey.
In addition to the PKK-related demands, Ankara is demanding the removal of restrictions on arms exports, the lifting of sanctions on the purchase of Russian S-400 systems, and their return to the American F-production program. 35 fighters.
Turkey is not alone. The Croatian President also opposed the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO. President Zoran Milanovic has decided to prevent Finland and Sweden from joining NATO until the electoral law in Bosnia and Herzegovina is changed. According to Milanovic, Bosnian law now violates the rights of ethnic Croats.
Also, according to the Croatian leader, “the interests of Ukraine, as well as Finland and Sweden, are not the most serious issue for Zagreb.”
Still, according to the administration of US President Joe Biden, Ankara and Zagreb’s suspicions will be cleared and NATO countries will unanimously decide to grant membership to Sweden and Finland. Biden has repeatedly stated that Finland and Sweden “meet all the criteria for NATO membership”.
In this context, it should be noted that so far all decisions in the North Atlantic Council have been taken exclusively unanimously. Thus, each new member’s decision to join the alliance becomes more difficult, making NATO a frankly ineffective organization.
It is difficult and sometimes impossible to take any operational decision by consensus in an organization of thirty members.
The NATO bloc is helpless today. Any bid from the United States and the first army in this world can be blocked there, even by Turkey or Croatia, but if on the block it can be blocked by the state with a corn plane or two motorized infantry battalions.
This situation cannot be considered normal for the American military and politicians. Therefore, the modernization of the North Atlantic Alliance’s governance structures seems absolutely necessary for the Pentagon in the near future.
Various options are currently being considered for the “upgrade” of NATO, but there are two main options among them. The first is to make decisions by simple voting in the North Atlantic Alliance. In this case, for example, it would be relatively easy to carry out a project that meets the views of the White House through NATO.
The second option is to create a “management board” within the framework of the military bloc, which will include several of the leading states of the alliance. For example, they can include the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Germany. France, with its dissenting opinion on any military-political issue, is considered inappropriate by many analysts in the West to be included in such a board of directors. Paris could derail any solution carefully devised at the Pentagon.
In the absence of systemic reforms, NATO risks turning into a debate club, where even the basic decision-making procedure can take months and in the current military-political situation may seem like a deadly phenomenon for the bloc. .
The author’s view may not coincide with the editors’ position.
Author biography:
Mikhail Mikhailovich Khodarenok is a military observer for socialbites.ca, a retired colonel.
Graduated from the Minsk Higher Engineering Anti-Aircraft Missile School (1976),
Air Defense Military Command Academy (1986).
Commander of the S-75 anti-aircraft missile battalion (1980–1983).
Deputy commander of an anti-aircraft missile regiment (1986-1988).
Senior officer of the Air Defense Forces Chief of Staff (1988-1992).
General Staff Main Operations Directorate Officer (1992-2000).
Graduate of the Military Academy of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces (1998).
Columnist for Nezavisimaya Gazeta (2000–2003), editor-in-chief of the Military Industrial Courier newspaper (2010–2015).
Source: Gazeta
