US imperialism and security debates

Following Turkey's approval of Sweden's NATO membership, the US announcement that it would sell F-16 fighter jets to Turkey has reignited debates regarding defense and security. First and foremost, the following questions came to mind:

Is the US itself not the greatest security threat and the greatest supporter of terrorism for Turkey? How can one explain requesting F-35 fighter jets from the US, participating in its production chain, investing in it, making payments, and then receiving a negative response from the US, only to then make a U-turn on the Sweden issue and settle for F-16 fighter jets? Would settling for this not lead to complacency and laziness in the goal of building a national aircraft?

The questions can certainly be multiplied.

There is also great value in conducting the discussion on a theoretical level. Because defense and security are concepts that affect every field, from economy to diplomacy, and from energy to education.

We know that security is one of the most frequently used concepts in foreign policy and international relations. It is practically at the center of theoretical debates. In foreign policy and defense and security policies, it is handled in a multifaceted way, primarily including border security, the security of economic assets and values, and energy security. Experts focusing on this field state that in recent years, security has been defined more broadly and new dimensions and elements have been added to it. In short, when we say security today, we do not only think of war, armed conflict, terrorism, organized crime, human smuggling, human trafficking, or drug and arms trafficking. At the same time, for example, environmental problems, climate change, mass migration, natural resources, epidemics, and cyberspace also come to mind.

Some experts and commentators emphasize that, in parallel with the globalization of terrorism, security has also become globalized, and that especially great powers ensure their security through steps they take, interventions they make, and measures they adopt on a global scale. This is true. However, this situation applies to great powers. It does not apply to all states.

It should never be forgotten that the greatest supporter of terrorism in the world is US imperialism itself. It supports terrorist organizations against the countries it targets, carries out coups in those countries, and engages in all kinds of destabilizing activities. Turkey is among the countries that know this reality best.

The traditional and widespread view, which we can call classical, accepts that the main major security threat to states comes from outside, from another state. Moreover, this external threat is armed. According to some experts, this approach is outdated, old, and narrow. It does not include new security problems. Because today, threats have multiplied, diversified, and differentiated. They have changed in dimension, method, tool, and face. Therefore, the new definition of security must fit this situation.

However, no matter how theoretical debates develop, when we say security, the security of the state still comes to mind first. Because primarily, the security of the state is essential.

It should be noted that security is, as it was yesterday, a very important, even untouchable, almost magical concept today. So much so that sometimes, many relevant or irrelevant topics are forced into the concept of security. States and governments want to use security as a justification to do whatever they want, and especially to cover up their own failures by hiding behind the concept of an external enemy. They use citizens' concerns about security to direct society and gain the support of the masses. Security is also used to suspend freedoms, human rights, personal inviolability, and freedom of expression, as well as to avoid fulfilling the requirements of a social state. Governments always demand that the nation make sacrifices in the name of security. Since it is a matter of security, it is usually easy to convince the nation. Because the background of the concept of security is a comfortable and sheltered area for governments that prefer to take refuge in it.

It is a common situation to demand constant sacrifice from the public by putting security forward. Everyone may see their own field as a priority in terms of security. Although soldiers may come to mind first, since security is a very broad concept, environmentalists may demand that resources allocated to the environment, educators to education, health professionals to health, and architects and engineers to zoning be further increased, among other reasons, on the grounds of national security. It is natural. It is a common situation.

National security naturally includes security measures taken primarily against other states. Its scope highlights military, political, and economic dimensions. These three dimensions are also known as the elements of national power in the classical sense. In that context, there is a direct and close relationship between national power and national security. However, today, threats to security do not only come from another state, but also from terrorist organizations that are under the control of or are puppets of other states, imperialist states, hostile or rival states. Terrorist organizations such as PKK – PYD – YPG, FETÖ, and ISIS are clear evidence of this.

While states form their defense and security strategies, they also conduct threat assessments along with their own means and capabilities. In this context, priorities, interests, goals, threat definitions, threat perceptions, geopolitics, conjuncture, regional and global dynamics, and alliance relations are definitely observed and taken into account.

The flexibility, breadth of boundaries, and even ambiguity of the concept of security often create problems in politics. Because security is a concept that is difficult to grade. Being in low security, semi-security, or incomplete security means not being in security. On the other hand, history has shown us that there is no such thing as living under absolute security.