In a recent post, I took a look at the interesting story behind the presence of NATO nuclear bombs at Turkey's Incirlik airbase and how they fit into Ankara's strategic and security calculations. Those interested in diving deeper into the question of Turkey's nuclear policy might want to take a look at a new report released today by the Centre for Economics and Foreign Policy Studies (EDAM), an Istanbul-based think tank. The takes a comprehensive look at Turkey's nuclear policy, from its current plans to start producing nuclear energy to its position on regional non-proliferation.
From the paper's executive summary of Turkey's non proliferation and nuclear diplomacy policies:
History has shown that states willing to commit resources and time can overcome the technical obstacles and successfully develop first generation nuclear weapons. However, most nuclear-capable states have chosen to remain non-nuclear. The decision to pursue nuclear weapons is rooted in technical capability combined with decision maker intent. At the moment, policy makers worry that an Iranian nuclear weapon will force its neighbors to explore the nuclear option. The oft-repeated argument claims that an Iranian nuclear weapon will lead to a regional arms race. Turkey, along with Egypt and Saudi Arabia, are the countries most often cited as the countries most likely to develop indigenous nuclear capabilities to counter Iran.
The homepage of the (newly, and poorly, redesigned) Hurriyet Daily News features a fairly provocative headline today: "Turkey given possession of nuclear warheads, report says." So has Turkey just become the Middle East's newest nuclear power? The real story is a lot less sensational, yet also much more interesting, than that.
Turkey, as a member of NATO, has in fact hosted tactical nuclear weapons since the 1950's. Today, NATO keeps an estimated stockpile of 60-70 nuclear bombs at the Incirlik air base in southern Turkey, down from 90 in 2001. Most of these (some 50) are designed to be delivered by United States aircraft (which are not housed at Incirlik and would have to be flown in and armed for any mission). The rest are earmarked for Turkish fighter jets, although it appears that Turkish pilots are currently not being trained for nuclear missions. (Hurriyet's sloppy story follows up on a more carefully written one that appeared the day before in the Vatan newspaper, written by Washington correspondent Ilhan Tanir.)
From an interesting report published at the end of last year by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which looked at the status of the the US's tactical nuclear weapons in Europe, especially in light of NATO's newly-developed "Strategic Concept," which places less importance on these weapons:
Has Georgia really become Washington’s poor relative, who spends hours waiting in the White House lobby while the party is swinging inside? One TIME Magazine reporter makes that argument in The Huffington Post, implying that, when approached by Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili these days, Obama and other Western leaders apologetically point at their watches and run to a meeting with Russia's Dmitri Medvedyev.
Busy trying to cooperate with Russia on nuclear matters, Washington seems increasingly to avoid saying the G-word, and, when it does, the mention is not always quite what Tbilisi had in mind. On May 10, for instance, Obama declared that Georgia is no “obstacle” to proceeding with a US nuclear cooperation pact with Russia.
Granted, old friends like Senator John McCain and ex-Deputy Assistant Secretary of State David Kramer have come out recently to boost the Georgia cause. But it's the White House itself that's seen as the best defense against the big, bad wolf -- or bear -- roaming outside Georgia's house.
The White House does issue statements in support of Georgia's territorial integrity. Yet, to many Georgians, this is akin to commenting on a friend’s Facebook photo instead of meeting him for drinks.
Feedback
We would like to hear your opinion about the new site. Tell us what you like, and what you don't like in an email and send it to: info@eurasianet.org
