Can the US be a strategic ally?

In international relations and foreign policy, terms frequently used such as partnership, alliance, and cooperation create very high expectations, especially when the word "strategic" is added to them. This is an exaggerated expectation. It is wrong. These concepts should not be used randomly, generously, haphazardly, or frequently. Especially when it comes to an alliance with a major state or an imperialist power, let alone a strategic alliance, is not easy. It is difficult, and very difficult at that. When the US is involved, it should never be forgotten that the US has only two strategic allies on Earth: the United Kingdom and Israel. Even Canada and Australia, with whom the US has very close relations, are not considered strategic allies.

In everyday language, partnership is a concept generally used in economic and commercial relations. When it comes to relations between states, in addition to the term partnership, the terms alliance and ally are used even more commonly. In international relations, an alliance relationship describes a set of relations that is more intense, deeper, stronger, more permanent, more comprehensive, more binding, and longer-term than a partnership relationship. There is also cooperation, which is used for a shorter-term and more limited form of relationship. Alliance and partnership involve longer-term goals and more comprehensive cooperation compared to mere collaboration. 

When the word "strategic" is added before the terms ally and alliance, it is intended to convey that the relations are more important, more prioritized, more vital, more indispensable, and more decisive. It implies that the parties have come together around more significant interests. This term is used for alliances established to achieve primary goals. Moreover, a relationship like a strategic alliance, which also includes a military dimension—meaning it envisions fighting together if necessary—cannot be easily established with every state. 

For states, it is clear that a strategic alliance relationship—in other words, when another state is defined as a strategic ally—is not just a casual, random, or haphazard relationship established with any state. Therefore, it is essential to think about this concept at length. Because a precise alignment and consensus on priorities, goals, interests, and threat definitions are mandatory. 

TURKEY-US RELATIONS ARE STRUCTURALLY PROBLEMATIC

In Turkey, concepts such as strategic ally, strategic partner, and strategic cooperation are widely used. Many experts, diplomats, soldiers, journalists, and scientists argue that Turkey-US relations are a strategic alliance. This is incorrect. For Turkey, the US is not a strategic ally or a strategic partner, but only and exclusively a strategic adversary. This is because there is not only a lack of harmony but a deep chasm and a major contradiction between the priorities, goals, and interests of the two states. The US is an imperialist state that seeks to divide Turkey and regional countries, openly provides all kinds of support to all anti-Turkey terrorist organizations, and positions itself against Turkey in all bilateral and multilateral disputes and tensions to which Turkey is a party. 

The US supports the PKK-PYD-YPG, FETO, and ISIS terrorist organizations. It embraces the so-called genocide allegations. It positions itself against Turkey in Cyprus, the Aegean Sea, and the Mediterranean. It interferes in Turkey's internal affairs at every opportunity. Its support for coups and coup attempts, the sanctions it has imposed on Turkey, and its anti-Turkey statements are well-remembered. It possesses many and varied tools to destabilize Turkey's economy and politics, and it does not hesitate to use them. 

Given this situation, claiming that the US is Turkey's strategic ally is a thought devoid of objective foundations, disconnected from reality, and contrary to reason and science. Not only do the priorities, goals, interests, expectations, threat definitions, and threat perceptions of the two countries not overlap, but the scales and capacities of the two states do not align either. Turkey's only strategic allies can be Azerbaijan and the TRNC.  

US INFLUENCE IS STRONG IN TURKEY

Pro-Americanism in Turkey, which spreads across a wide field from politics to bureaucracy, from academia to media—or in common parlance, 'Americanism' and, on a larger scale, 'NATO-ism'—is not just a stance in foreign policy, defense, and security policies, but a much broader political-economic attitude and an ideological preference. It is almost a doctrine. It requires admiring the US in every field, from its regime to its foreign policy, from its cinema to its consumption habits, from its culture to its sports, and from its palate to its fashion. Furthermore, it requires believing that the US is always right under any circumstances, accepting that it will always win, and advocating that it is Turkey's greatest friend. In this respect, it is widespread across a broad spectrum, from the center-right to the center-left, from liberal democrats to social democrats, and from nationalists to conservatives. It is strong in the ruling bloc as well as in the opposition. It is influential in the CHP, as well as in the IYI Party and the DEM Party. 

The mentality that did not object to Turkey being the outpost of the US—and therefore of NATO, the US's apparatus for aggression and occupation—in the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean throughout the Cold War, continues to defend Turkey's NATO membership today, despite all the irreconcilable contradictions between Turkey and the US. Among some circles that criticize the US and NATO, there is the following approach: 'Turkey's NATO membership protects Turkey from NATO itself. Because Turkey is a NATO member, it learns about NATO's anti-Turkey stance and machinations from the inside, in advance, and can prevent them.' 

This is also a baseless and inconsistent view. Because what we have lived through and our experiences have shown us that the reality is not like that at all. Moreover, knowing that the US, as an imperialist power, has many and varied tools to establish influence over Turkey and other countries is one thing; trying to legitimize NATO in this way is another. In addition to NATO membership, the US has many and varied tools at its disposal, ranging from the US dollar being the global reserve currency and the currency widely used in global trade, to the US arms industry, US cultural influence, soft power tools, the widespread use of English, and the US armed forces. Turkey is among the countries that know these best and should know them best. 

YOU CANNOT BE BOTH AN ALLY AND AN ADVERSARY

Given this situation, with problems in Turkey-US relations piling up like a mountain and deep contradictions existing between the two countries, it is also wrong to compare bilateral relations to a "troubled marriage," an "insecure marriage," or an "incompatible marriage." An even greater mistake is to define the relations as a "strategic alliance." However, even the fact that Turkey has been subjected to CAATSA sanctions—a law through which the US fights its adversaries via economic sanctions—summarizes the state of bilateral relations (since a state cannot be defined as both an ally and an adversary at the same time). 

As shown by the US not delivering the F-35 fighter jets for which Turkey has already paid, not refunding the money, and conditioning the sale of F-16 jets—which it decided to sell only after much hesitation—on Turkey's approval of Sweden's NATO membership, the relations between the two countries are not a strategic alliance or an advanced alliance, but are on an extremely unhealthy footing. They contain mistrust, not mutual trust.  

Finally, one must not forget this; The US is an imperialist state. Turkey, on the other hand, is a medium-sized state founded by fighting against imperialism. Imperialism is the most advanced stage of capitalism; it relies on systematic and continuous exploitation, domination, oppression, and, when necessary, force. An imperialist state appropriates the surplus value of another state on an economic scale, plunders and usurps its resources; on a political scale, it interferes with its independence and sovereignty, meddles in its internal affairs, directs, governs, and utilizes it in accordance with its own desires. Despite the numerous issues Turkey faces with the US—ranging from Syria to Iraq, Cyprus to the Blue Homeland, the Black Sea to the Eastern Mediterranean, relations with Russia to Israel's aggression, the Treaty of Lausanne to the Montreux Convention, and from so-called genocide allegations to the fight against terrorism—it is impossible for Turkey to be an ally, let alone a strategic ally, of the US.