as sophisticated as it is right now, if it weren't for the help of your western allies, the problem is turkey is experiencing or has experienced over the last decades or so. and particularly since the end of the cold war. but also during the cold war may be part of the problem. yes, turkey is posture on, on russia, in the united states, sometimes change. and then sometimes basically turkey pos closer to russia, closer to the western world. well actually it's, it's been a reliable member of the, of the west, new alliance nieto. i mean, since 1952, it's been 70 plus years. so there's no question about that. but what it is is, and there are certain times at which a turkey feels closer to russia in descend this, that photo status and as turkey decided to cultivate good relations to moscow. in

1906. the poll when it was the buff. why do united states by a very notorious letter coming from the us president, lyndon johnson, which is known as the johnson that are in well, basically it was about cyprus, but the actual it were wide, wide ranging. and then tucker, basically decided to cultivate good, good ties to russia. i know that during the cold war, the decision to cultivate, the relationship with the soviet union was essentially secondary. it was an emotional and perhaps also a strategic reaction to the americans and buffle as their relationships them. now, is it conditional on, on the west, or is it this thing into itself? well, this is what i was going to say. actually, it is not conditional on west energy above all. ok, basically,

now what we have as mental is of the turkish russian or approach mall these days. one is that while turkey doesn't get along with its western partners, whatever is important to khaki, we don't basically see i to i with the western world. so let's go, i mean, the west and particularly the united states project of carving out a quarter. the son of them is least supplying the p k. k. militarily. the cypress question and other matters were, you know, you're just a numerous one up to the, to an old as what you have been against you that is decidedly against the united states a. but in addition to that, there is that are so many other things. one dimension i think is since the end of the cold war, things have changed. and in addition to what we did in terms of,

you know, close corporation in trade economy and the soviet union's building, turkeys have been dusty and all that we have, we had had flourishing trade relations with russia. russia is not turkey's biggest trade partner in terms of tourism, again, basically in the, in terms of trade and economy, what we have has so passed any other concern and the law. the other thing is people get, get along very well. what do you essentially saying is that the russian church, you have a mutually beneficial to some extent, a fair relationship. but still, when it comes to geopolitics, you are firmly aligned with the well, despite the fact of, as you mentioned, that turkey has many grievances, security,

gremlins, substantial grievances with the united states and many of its partners. now, what is it? is it that the was, doesn't understand your security concerns all that they couldn't care? less about them. let's. but beside what the west, a basically thinks about turkey because it has a lot of elements in that. i mean, what makes western policy towards turkey is simple because we have a united states, which i call the empire, lies an article in particular. basically the oregon's has taken new height in the last few decades after the dissolution of the soviet union. and the way they treat anybody, everybody around and is totally unacceptable for us. they come and tell you what to do. and then you say, for instance, as one of the case as the united states basically decided to invade and occupy iraq . while i'm going to open and northern front using your territories,

and i'm going to basically put my troops on everywhere in your territory. and tucker says, wow, you know, we can't have it like that. and d, turkey played along with that, not only in the rock, but also in theory, which i think surprised many americans, what time was everywhere because it's been quite an experience country in dealing with the west. in general, we are an expert. i mean, how they live, for instance, we know it quite well. well, you know, i'm sorry for jumping over in the, interrupting your hold time. but i think that's a critical question. you know, the united states, you've been dealing with them for decades and decades, and yet for a considerable amount of time until very recently, you played a long you did what they wanted you to do, including, for example, on theory a one to one, syria began or rather, one of the attempts to violently change the regime there began turkey, played along with that despite the fact that he had very good trade,

despite the fact that there are govern. and then they are the government at the time, had a very good relationship. you have extensive border and many security concerns there, but you played according to the american june. why was that? why did you stay with them for so long despite the fact that they deceived them, ignores the security concerns repeatedly. while that was a big mistake on the part of the incumbent government, and i have been a boss, his parish, critical debt, is since its inception, while again, even the present incumbent went along with that. basically, the american so pushed towards the region and the united. what the united states is trying to do in syria and what they want to do in the end seem to be overlapping. and that was a big, big, big mistake and ideologically inspired part of policy, basically correct how with turkey's national interest. and,

and that is why it was on that basis that the present government has been and reshaping its policy in every respect. and to shake it just extending favor to follow is to also make the best of given the recent memory. for example, of the 2016 cool, which is a pretty shadowy story and the, the government that use the west of being behind it was the point of turkey being within that alliance. given that the trust it doesn't seem to be there. well, if you're not dead, for instance, you can't be toast within this. sweden joining nato. if you're not there, then you can't. you can't prevent south cypress joining nato. if you're not there, you will didn't know what's, what's been going on, that we have all the officers and officials working and occupying highly. you're

just and you political to more than a defensive lines for you at this point. oh, well, it may shortly. i mean, if you ask the people in the street and no one would ever tell you that if we find ourselves in trouble, if we get a cock, we will get considerable support from nato countries. immediate. unless, unless it is absolutely in their interest to come along and fight for turkey. so that is why we are trying to build our own defense. if we doubt nieto without expectations, if you like that the nato countries will come to operate immediately. but at the same time, you know, you are, you have one leg in nato. why not? and then at the same time, at the same time, you cultivate good relations to rush up, but also to other countries including china and you know, breaks anybody,

you know, shawn, guy, corporation, organization. this, why not? this is the multiple a world. do you think they will ever appoint when tricky will have to decide whether it's face within native given the meter? as you said before, in other interviews, it's not the book clock. you know, there's certain military obligations that come with it. do you think they will come a point when turkey will have to make that decision, whether it is within nato, within the multiple or world, whatever it means? well, you cross the river when you get to the breach. so you wouldn't know the circumstances . i mean, and you have to know to so you have to have the circumstances 1st and then you would have to decide on the basis of the circumstances. but i can't imagine a situation in which tuck it would be me being natal auto cross station or out of some anger or out of some kid themselves, or out of

a dispute with one or 2 nato members. we have learned how to deal with them. why not? so if they basically to do something nasty to us, we can do something more nasty to them. but don't forget, i mean it was a mistake to enlarge in a total or that much if you bring in more and more there's going to be more and more divisional. busy divisions within nato, and some of the crux like the to corporate, the crux within nato are going to white. ok, well there's going to be a little crack between you and me right now because we have to take a very short break, but we'll be back in just a few moments that you ah ah, what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy confrontation,

let it be an arms. race is often very dramatic. development only personally, i'm going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very difficult. time. time to sit down and talk with i did with this woman, did you do?

you put up a list of all, but each with ah, ah welcome back to well, department has some, you know, professor of political science and international relations at multiple university professor, you know, before the break we were discussing, did the so called the lines a relationship between turkey and many of the western countries and specifically nato, but it is pretty clear that their russian turkish relationship are not without their problems. and i think it's, we're saying that our countries have put more wars between themselves than any other country that russia has had that relationship with. and yet, i both leaders,

i mean president put an area on, have been managing to you know, find a way of both little grievances out through mutual interest, especially after that very perilous moment. the juncture point in 2015, i think when the turkish military guided by a different vision of foreign policy, as you pointed out on down the russian fighter, just killing the pilot, which last to the death of the pilot. now, can i give you a broader view on this relationship? why do you think i'm, it's been managed the way it's been manage and do you think that's a good model for any other countries? while it is certain to be an exemplary relationship, basically, and what remains at the center of the relationship is national interest. it is an at rational national insurance turkeys nationally trust, loppy. now,

for instance, during the cold war, we had good relations at for about a couple of decades or so. and it was all economy. but now, as you pointed out, took in russia and finally realize that they should actually have a consultation mechanism about political matters. now political relationship and political consultation, i think it's important. so you get together, for instance, we had the other by john armenia, a war in 2020, but it didn't basically tear apart their turkish russian approach money, which is important. so supposedly armenia is backed by russia and as a by johnny beck by to keep but you know, the 2 countries, the 2 capitals have managed a relationship. and there has been put in, came out several times and said, you know,

those territories on which the fighting was going on. all belong taught by john. so what do we say about that? and so they understand each other now. and when we did stand each other, but i think they understood each other prior to 2015 when the tragedy with the job happened. what was the turning point in the turkish reasoning? because i think the russian policy is that turkey is pretty much the same, but it's, i take it from your writing, but it's the turkish policy with these, i mean both russia and a broader positioning within your asia have changed. well, i think the idea logically, a inspired polity was, you know, had to be basically put aside because you can't make any a, you can't make any progress with that policy. and they have the light that it was a mistake. plus, as you pointed out for us that there was the qu,

they were in fighting within the government. and there were, you know, the sort of problems and all that to a heart shall i say, ironing out or says what we are doing basically. and then in the end, the turkish state was able to see through the mag, compliance for instance, in syria. they were trying to divide up into 3 parts using iso as an excuse. and once again, the touch stated black establishment lies that then you have a turning point in all that there was disappointed with the american government. there was disappointment with others. but in the end, the real and bases of national interest of russia and turkey brought the 2 countries on the same truck not that we had today. and, and i think there are also fundamental under mentally important dimensions to the

relationship. one is that khaki doesn't proceed russia as a whole, as it used during the cold war that you. ready cold war was a different period and, and now the 2 countries are even cooperating on military you know, military matters. and if we see talk and russia producing high tech quality weapons in the next few years, or in the next decade or so, i would have rise. there are still many very, very difficult issues and certain themes, the interest of russia and the interest of turkey do not overlap. they in fact, conflict them. yet. one of the aspects of this relationship i think is trust. and president putin has spoken about that. a number of times he said that for example, president or the on is a manual drives, a very hard bargain. he is

a tough negotiator. but once an agreement is reached, reached, it can be trusted. and this is somewhat antiquated notion, you know, calling somebody a man of the word, but i think it's important for both leaders is a take him positively tricky because i know for many of our friends in the west and delivery circles that would be seen as a as something somewhat offensive to call somebody ma'am, and to say that his words could be trusted. well, it's sometimes comes on the criticism by door position by delay presence as you put it in touch it too. and, but the liberals have lost much better prestige in this country, so they have hardly to be trusted by the me and one the other. and yes, there is a relationship on the basis of leader to lead that. but this is, it is important, but it may be,

it may seem to be quite fragile to the outside. but what i'm here arguing for is that what basically has brought turkey and russia on the truck is there. is they interest process or, you know, is that interest, national interests or target understood in the same way by the opposition. we all know about the upcoming elections in turkey. do you expect any sort of continuity of foreign policy, including on the issue of russia? if the opposition comes to power? well i think in our position lead there was on record one's saying that turkish retained ukraine fide in the war. but you see, when you basically get to this government, when you come to power,

then you put the different capital of things. it could be a different kettle of fish. i mean, what do you mean by taking ukraine site? for instance? does that mean you are going to turn against russia? or does that mean? you know, you may be just empty platitude. you would be just saying in one international conference in, in one international meeting in nate or whatever you, or, of course is the most important question would be, are you going to apply all this sanctions to russia? if you do, then you are going to be that need, you are going to be very, very, in a very difficult situation. i mean, we have experienced that with the rock with the united states in the crisis. you know, the united states pushes you into something. and then you expect that you would be

basically burst by the united states and by the collective west for your losses. and then nothing comes along. there's one factor i think that needs to be kept in mind. the overall landscape and geopolitical landscape of the region is changing, as i'm sure you're heard about the chinese brokerage deal between the uranium and the saudis. and many of the experts i have spoken to they. they have great hopes for not only the syrian resolution, successful theory and resolution, but also the, the solving of the palestinian problem. and you know, the successful conflict resolution in many forms. but there one big question there . if that happens, if those positive trends continue, what it would essentially mean is not only the, and of the years dominance, but effectively the lack of the us interference in the region. do you think that americans will allow that to happen,

or do you think they may use various events including elections in certain countries to continue stirring the pot? them continue with di, divide and conquer policy? well, i think what matters here is the feelings of the people as far as the turkish people are concerned. if you ask, i mean all the polls show that there is enormous degree of grievances against the united states, and it is not only in turkish american relations. for instance, you ask people who is at home for instance, who is in the wrong, who is in the right in the ukraine crisis, they would say it must be the americans. okay. it comes automatically. so that is why the opposition leader basically after that statement once and then stop that because you can't go against the people's wishes. so in that sense, and i'm, i'm, i'm, i'm quite firm in my,

in my argument. and that is, russian turkey structure really relations will remain on this truck. and whether or not your position is going to win the elections remains to be c. now, can i ask you one last question. you wrote that in this new multiple world middle powers like turkey will have a special place. and you also suggested that if the european union doesn't survive, that are european neighbors like france, germany, italy are, have great britain. those countries that used to be great, you repeat powers, will also have to come up with some sort of self interested. foreign policy isn't up to optimistic. do you think they still have a capacity of conceptualizing self interested policy,

let alone executing it while they the new multiple order it is going to be very interesting to watch. it will live long. you know, it's going to be really, really interesting to follow. one is that it is this multiple parity is not going to be western center because there is china, there is draw shot. and there are also powers like super powers or potentially superpowers like india regime and others. so we're the west and dominated multiple or, or you know, bipolar all unipolar world or did is coming to an end. and the 2nd thing is, for the 1st time, you know, multiple and well daughter that are going to be countries like me, the powers like turkey, iran, and quite a number of others. as you mention, perhaps european powers, even if you're repeating union, basically there survives all the pressures of the multiple world daughter.

it is not going to be very closely integrated, union will know that and quite a number of european great powers of the 1900 century early 20th century are going to remain middle powers within that system. so the americans will do everything to stop that. but as we have seen over the last world, once or more with the ukraine war, dan, not mighty, they can stop it. and this is a, i think this is going to roll on along the was like i said, you know, i have to still be here. thank you very much for that. it's been a fascinating conversation. thank you. it was my pleasure, and thank you for watching hope to see her again on well, the part with

a, with

a trial for these and other countries. united states of america is different. wearable people long to be free. they will find a friend in the united states ah, with i'm with a very busy, so the city draw. you look at the incentives and need to get a few color revolutions is one among several means to reach the goal

of conquering foreign lands and bringing them on to the help of u. s. western economic interest. people think sadie, i don't that he did to everybody did them during the training course. so no, that's a lot of our america, final goal of the same revolutions to ensure that there are no independent players in the world anymore. a a, the main so states in the terra talk that so the life of

a prominent russian journalist awaits her 1st call, tearing in moscow. i was following an explosion in saint petersburg. hans, the nuclear capable of the scandal miss our system to beller as nato member states strengthens. i'm prepared to accept finland into the block, collaborating with profit french intelligence services are accused of funding terrorist to enable them to continue operations in syria. that's according to the company's a former ceo and jerusalem sees an emerging religious crisis as palestinian christian say they are increasingly subject.