A jackpot for the West, a consolation prize for the East

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Summit was held on September 1, 2026, in Bishkek, the capital of Kyrgyzstan. The seeds of the SCO were sown thirty years ago as the Shanghai Five, and that structure officially gained the status of an international organization in 2001. Today, the SCO, which has reached a ten-member structure, covers a large part of the Asian geography. Although the organization has not yet completed its institutional evolution and there is no absolute harmony among its members, it is making a name for itself more and more every day. It is debatable how accurate this definition is, but today, when 'Global South' is mentioned, the SCO is the first thing that comes to mind. The SCO perspective is also discussed from time to time for Turkey.

Although the SCO is sometimes compared to NATO, it does not seem possible to establish an identity between the two institutions, both in terms of their functioning and binding provisions. Rather than a collective security alliance, SCO members focus on separatism, soft power threats, and economic cooperation opportunities. The shift of the world economy's center of gravity to Asia naturally plays an important role in this. Because, unlike Europe, which reminds one of the past, Asia in today's world evokes progress and innovation; in short, the future.

So, how close is this future to us? We can also ask the question as follows: How much does Turkey internalize the Asian Age? Of course, most importantly, is Ankara really interested in Asia-centered institutions like the SCO? The short answer to these questions is no! The reason is that Turkey has been in the lap of the Western-centered system for decades. Western hegemony has permeated every area of the country. Even in the world of ideas, any small search outside the West is immediately labeled as an axis shift. In a mental universe where Russian salad was called American salad for years, these might be considered normal, but as the world's center shifts in the 21st century, it is still not sustainable for Turkey's axis to remain fixed. As for rhetoric at the level of a neighborhood coffee shop like 'We will join Shanghai, we will leave NATO,' it is not even ridiculous!

There is also an ironic side to the matter. While one of the most pro-Western governments in Turkey's history is in power, manipulations can be made on television that we are moving from the West to the Eastern bloc. The truth is that Turkey is dependent on the West in many parameters, especially economic indicators, and this dependency has skyrocketed, especially in recent years! So why are discussions such as whether Turkey has shifted to Eurasia (this issue actually has nothing to do with the SCO), whether Turkey will become a member of the SCO or BRICS, and even fictional rhetoric such as the TRC (Turkey-Russia-China) Alliance constantly being developed?

To answer these questions, it is necessary to emphasize the relationship and permeability between foreign policy and domestic politics. The current government is aware that the easiest way to consolidate its power within the country is to reach an agreement with the West, and specifically the US, and it has been developing policies in this direction at an increasing rate in recent years. These policies have taken on a full compliance package, especially after Trump. Don't let the word compliance fool you; this is actually the acceptance of the US's strategic demands by Turkey. The most crucial part of the matter is that the economy is kept afloat through 70 billion dollars of hot money coming through the Western-centered financial system. In addition, blurring the areas of interest in Syria and legitimizing the PKK with the slogan of a Turkey without terrorism is an extra. The recently signed Mecca Treaty is also a reflection of the US's new regional plan on the ground.

"That's all well and good, but what does this have to do with the SCO and/or Asia?" do not say. In today's world system, the US sees that its hegemony is ending and that different power centers, especially China, are emerging. While even the US accepts this, that is, while it experiences its limited power hitting a wall in Iran, the decision-makers in Ankara must also be calculating something. Could there be a concern summarized as: if we steer absolutely toward the West as a guaranteed way to stay in power, but offend the East and draw its reaction, we might face a bill in today's multipolar international system?

To alleviate the concern, although they try to implement a policy called balance, it is more accurate to call this a game of "a jackpot for the West, a consolation prize for the East" rather than balance, while leaning on one side and venting the other. Do those in the East buy this game? I don't think so, but if they do, bon appétit to them! As required by the game, one day when we wake up, the junior partner of the government says "TRC" with a delusion as if it were against the senior partner. It is not enough; just like in the same resolution process, the scribes go on duty to spread the perception that there is a split in the government bloc. The truth is that there is neither a split nor the existence of a balance of power where such a split could occur. The government only ensures the continuation of its power by following the US line in every field, from the economy to security policies. The main opposition is tasked with waiting for its turn to govern from the West, and in the meantime, the one who takes the horse passes Üsküdar.

While Turkey was undergoing a major transformation internally and the regime was changing, the agenda was filled for years with empty and 'mixed' foreign policy discussions such as Atlantic-Eurasia. What actually happened was the erosion of the fundamental qualities of the Republic, the rapid completion of the counter-revolution that began many years ago, and the country, which was made completely dependent in every way, getting worse every day. That is, it was us, as the Turkish people, losing!

Speaking of losing, as you know, since the beginning of world history, some have lost and some have won from time to time. The answers given to the question of why we lost are varied. In our history, the explanation for the First World War, 'We lost because the Germans lost,' is famous. The modern version of this was expressed by former Renault Turkey CEO Hakan Kutlu specifically for the automotive sector as follows: 'We don't have the technology, we are in the losers' club along with Europe!'

If we go back to the beginning, issues like SCO-NATO are high-politics matters to be handled at a strategic level. In this context, a plain truth is before us: Leaving aside the issue of whether it is beneficial or harmful for Turkey, a NATO country cannot be a member of the SCO!

A serious state that really cares about the Asian Age would not tie itself to the losing side, at least with shackles like the Customs Union. In summary; a person's mirror is their work, not their words!