You didn't properly explain why turkey and Russia have had 17 wars, while they did fight over influence in the Caucasus and Crimean/southern Ukraine you didn't mention the underlying reason: black sea acces. Russia throughout its history has always attempted to get out, to entangle itself in the great European trade and cultural space, to catch up. A crucial point to this was gaining acces to the black sea, the only place they could realistically get a warm water port. The last factor here is the Bosporus straight. Without it russian trade and influence could at any time be cut off by turkey, in his will the Russian tzar who pioneered this strategy, Peter the Great, wrote a sentence to be read at the coronation of every subsequent tzar. Conquer Constantinopole.

Turkey's nato membership process isn't as simple as you told. We didn't just demand and join. Unlike other nations, Turkey joined Korean war and paid the price with lifes.

NATO's charter has provisions to defer to UN policy and procedure on issues which it doesn't explicitly address, expulsion being one of them. The UN provision requires a unanimous (except for the nation state being expelled) vote.

At 5:52 in NATO countries you have included Greece as a NATO member country. In fact, both countries gained accession to NATO pretty much at the same time.

Cyprus isn't a NATO member, but your map shows it as one. Although Turkey being out of NATO would see that change fairly quickly as they are the (main) reason for Cyprus not being in NATO.

Turkey has a strategic importance geopolitically for NATO. The country is a gateway and also a fence between Europe and the Middle East. Turkey knows that NATO cannot kick them out, and is playing a game to benefit themselves (of course, every country does that, so it's not necessarily an evil thing to do).

It’s in the name, North Atlantic… not Middle East Treaty Organisation

Military personnel numbers are not as important as "battle experience" and "tactical discipline". American and Turkish troops form the basis of NATO in this respect.

The main reason why Turkey didn't sanction Russia is that of economy. Turkey has an even bigger energy problem than the rest of europe because we import more than 50% of our oil and gas from Russia. Not to mention the huge amounts of tourists coming from Russia and the nuclear energy plant which is being constructed right now (We are building it with Russia). It would basically mean an economical suicide for Turkey to sanction Russia.

Dude, I am Swedish: While there is a fair bunch of misinformation (or at the very least misleading omission of information) coming from the Turkish government, mostly concerning our position on terrorism and what we think of PYD, YPG and PKK. However, even I realize that there is *no way* that NATO would drop Turkey out of the alliance; especially not for the sole purpose of getting Sweden and Finland in.

Turkey is also the first country that is invited to join the nato, the reason for this has a lot to do with the korean war in the 50’s. Adnan menderez was president at that time, he hasn’t even asked the turkisch parliament to send troops to korea, because he had tthe majority in the parliament.

No matter how difficult partner Turkey often times is, it is a very strategically placed one, so it is worth having it as an ally. Not to mention that the common membership of Greece and Turkey in NATO alliance deters them from being at each other's throats all the time. And yeah, I know that there are disagreements with Sweeden, but they should be worked out, because there is a common enemy: Russian bear.

Kicking out Turkey would be a strategic blunder. NATO would lose control of the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits, which in turn would make way for Russian expansion in the Mediterranean. Not to mention, the Turks might end up joining the Chinese bloc.

Not a chance. They will work it out. Dardanelles straight is too strategically important. Turkey can use this as an opportunity for some favourableness. Finland are pragmatic enough to say some niceties to get this over the line.

Turkey and Erdowan reminds one of that "fairweather" friend that just can never be counted on ...

Turkey is too important to kick but a rules change for adding members should be made so that it doesn’t have to be unanimous. Perhaps an 80% threshold.

Could they be? Yes. Will they? No. Strategically, Turkey is far more important to NATO then Sweden and Finland. After all, Turkey has the ability to cut off the Bospherus Straits to all warships. Turkeys drones are currently helping Ukraine fight back. It’s Army is one of the strongest in the NATO Alliance. And Erdogen, regardless his views on economics, is politically smart enough to know that all of these factors, give him serious political leverage. He knows he can demand concessions on this matter, and he will quite likely, get them. Even if it means slowing down Finalnds and Sweden’s NATO membership.

You're conflating EU with NATO. NATO is a defensive pact. It doesn't care if it's members are "democracies" or if they are Islamists. As long as they are willing to defend other member against external threats and doesn't cause too much internal strife, everyone is welcome. Also, you mixed up the timeline for the TR's arms embargo. Turkey tried to buy US made AA systems. The US didn't allow that. Turkey said if the US wasn't selling, they'd buy from Russia. US thought this was bluff. Turns out it wasn't a bluff(surprised Pikachu face) THEN weapons ban on Turkey was implemented. Also, it's important to mention, Sweden and Finland are two of the countries that banned weapons sales to Turkey. Don't you think expecting Turkey to promise to defend SWE if they are attacked by Russia while at the same time SWE is banning weapons sales to Turkey is a bit hypocritical? I think this videos tone is a perfect example of why many westerners think Turkey is "the problem child of Europe". You wouldn't expect the UK to protect France if the France was inviting IRA members to their parliaments and allowing them to do demonstrations against the UK on their streets. Yet all of Europe is expecting Turkey to just forget about Sweden doing all of those things for PKK. You might see the PKK as brave freedom fighters but that doesn't change the fact that they are considered a Terorist organisation by UN, USA and EU. Not to mention they've killed tens of thousands of Turkish civilians since 70s in bomb attacks. This is the irony of modern Turkey. Too "oriental" for westerners, too "western" for Arabs. I think Angela Merkel put it best. EU is a Christian club. No matter how "progressive" Turkey is, it'll never be a European country nor it will ever be a "natural" member of any Christian club as you rightly said in this video. Honestly, once the Russian thread is dealt with, I wouldn't be surprised if TR left NATO on it's own and forged closer ties with Asia.

France & England refused to side with helping Turkey upgrade pre WW1, as they wanted to carve it up as it continued to gradually fall apart! That is Why Germany stepped in to fend off the French & Poms, with the technical help they needed to modernise!

NATO needs Turkey more than Turkey needs NATO. Thanks for clarifying.

This video is full of inaccuracies… First of all its such a bold claim to say for Turkey it was a marriage of convenience.. Turkey has expressed her interest for Nato membership from the beginning. However as it was originally designed solely as a transatlantic alliance, US wasn’t really willing expand Nato southeastwards. Only after the membership of Italy it actually became a matter of discussion and consequently Turkey and Greece became Nato members SIMULTANEOUSLY back in 52. More importantly, implying TR to be “in cahoots” with RUS is appalling to me and totally disregards the fact that TR was literally fighting proxy wars against RUS in SYRIA as well as LIBYA meanwhile supplying UKR with weapons even before the war breakout (I would also like to remind you that EU countries were expressing their concerns for this) And a final point, while TR has been one of the biggest supporters for the UKR membership, within NATO, some other members were dragging their feet. we don’t question their place in the alliance for their objections but when TR expresses its security concerns as a precondition for the enlargement the alliance she immediately becomes “the Russian trojan horse” TR has many shortcomings, its democracy is in shambles (hopefully it will start changing in 23), its foreign policy time to time lacks finesse and more. But I strongly believe TR is not the only party to blame for the poor status of its relationship with the west, I think keeping TR in this family is beneficial not only for TR citizens but also for Europeans and N. Americans as well because the alternative is just perpetual instability at the alliance’s southern flank. TLDR: I appreciate NATOs utility of anchoring TR to the west in these shaky times but to repair structural problems we need more empathy on both sides. … cannot believe I wrote my first ever comment on this shit

1:48 you have a list of the Russo-Turkish wars. Most of those before 1800 were europe helping the growing Russia because Europe’s main concern was to weaken the ottomans. There is one war missing in the map in Crimean war of 1853 with ottomans and Europe against Russia. Europe at this point saw ottomans were weak and now wanted to container Russia. Russia lost the Crimean war

This question was on my mind thanks, looking forward to watching it. *** Man that is some colorful history on turky.. would love an update on this

i know there are a lot of hats but i think video was so good and had some really good points keep it up👌

Hmm, not sure how smart of a move that would be considering it could move them closer to Russia’s orbit which would run contrary to the goal of isolating Russia.

I feel that with Turkey controlling Black Sea access they will never be expelled from NATO they like most of history are in a really really really good strategic location.

It just makes more sense to kick out Erdogan than Türkiye...

The US and Britain etc could just make their own alliance with Finland and Sweden. I believe these 2 countries together could wipe out Russia (conventional) anyway.

I feel like his videos are more about pushing a narrative than providing information.

Turkey joined the Korean war in 1950, just before becoming a member of NATO, and although it seems unrelated to NATO, it was actually the "price" or the "goodwill" act that Turkey paid to get into NATO. Also, even though I agree that buying weapons from Russia was a stupid move, it was a reaction to US not selling Patriots to Turkey. And Finland and Sweden has weapon ambargos towards Turkey... I am disappointed that these "details" are overlooked in the video.

Thanks for the history lesson.

Right now, Nato looks bad.

Even if there is a mechanism that could be used to kick out Turkey, such an act may well push Turkey to Russia's side.

Turkey controls the straits to the Black Sea, meaning easy access to Russian held crimea and other regions. So, no, Turkey accession to NATO makes sense, your video does not depict the whole story

I have my issues with Turkey, but i don't think it's right (or wise) to kick them out because they have beef with Sweden. All of us have the right to deny a member from joining because we are expected to die for the sake of that new member.

If Turkey leaves NATO, it will spell the beginning of the end of NATO

Turkey sacrifice a brigade in Korea to join NATO. While Sweden and Finland enjoying neutralism

Great video!!!!!!!!

turkey shot down a Russian jet, something no other NATO member has ever dated to do. NATO needs it more then vice versa

An interesting irony of history is that the Russian SFSR actually helped Turkey get to a more powerful position after WWI. While Mustafa Kemal (later Atatürk) was organizing his resistance against the occupying Allies, the Turkish nationalists secured support from the newly established Russian SFSR (which was also in the midst of a civil war for control of their country). Lenin viewed Mustafa Kemal's campaign as a way to contain expansion of the west's sphere of influence in the middle east. Russian support of gold and weapons greatly helped the Turkish nationalists in their military campaigns against Greece and France and the Red Army even helped secure Turkey's gains in the east, following the Turco-Armenian war. Once the Treaty of Laussanne was signed, this saved Turkey from being an impoverished rump state in central Anatolia (per the Treaty of Sevres), to securing its full independence in its current borders (except for Hatay, which joined in 1939). Ironically it also helped Turkey kick the Allies out of Constantinople (Istanbul) and put the Turkish straits under Turkish control again. Roughly 20 years later, Stalin's expansionist policies would be set back due to the support his mentor and predecessor offered the Turks. Also a quick addition, Turkey heavily westernized in the interwar period. As president, Atatürk greatly reformed the country and transformed it from an Islamic monarchy to a secular, modern, western state - which is why Turkey is light years ahead of the Middle East in terms of societal norms and culture. So the Turkey that joined NATO in 1952 wasn't the same country that fought the Allies in WWI, it was seen as a potential ally of the west. Turkey's only real setbacks with NATO was its troubled relationship with Greece (Aegean islands and Cypurs) and more recently Erdogan trying to socially set the country back by 500 years.

Turkey is a smart country, as a French i know we often do not get along but i respect their strategic vision, something many europeans are simply lacking.

They actually CAN kick Turkey out of NATO based on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, article 60 2.A.

Turkey has Joined the NATO at the Korean War.They had to send Soldiers to Join NATO He didnt explain that.

Now why would anyone think its a good idea? Turkey is the ONLY NATO country that's DIRECTLY fighting Russia in 2 fronts: Libya and Syria, on top of fighting them indirectly in Ukraine and the caucasus. Turkey is NATO's 2nd largest army and its southern front. Is little Bulgaria going to protect NATO's south from Russia? Edit: its also worth mentioning that Turkey is why the black sea isn't a Russian lake

Given that this is TLDR EU, I think it'd be useful to convert the Nebula price to € as well 😊

Definitely about time!!

Right now, as a NATO member, Turkey seems to be more trouble than it's worth. If it wasn't for it's tactical positioning at the entrance to the black sea I feel that the rest of NATO would be showing them far less patience than they have done to date.

You completely skipped the part how Turkey fought in the Korean war and lost thousands of soldiers to get accepted into NATO

Turkey is a very important and powerful Nato member who also controls access to the Black Sea! We should not be talking about kicking out Turkey. Its up to Sweden and Finland to convince Turkey to let them in. It depends on how badly they want in. Other countries should not interfere. That's my opinion for whatever its worth.

The comparison of military personnel equalling military power is totally ridiculous.

Actually most other NATO countries don’t. They have values in common Turkey no longer shares. For example none of the others are threatening their allies with war everyday as routinely as they say good morning,

Before asking this question think about "What if Turkey was alligned with China and Russia?". Imagine Turkish drones was destroing Ukranian forces instead of Russian forces. Think about the countries neigbouring black sea. How world would look like if Turkey was hosting Chinese military bases instead of NATO military bases.

Even if Turkey was to be removed from NATO, it would still be a major problem as it will have no obligation not to allow Russian navy access all the black sea routes. Turkey out of NATO will be a gift to the Russians.

There is always a way. Dissolve the current NATO framework and make a new one (NATO 2.0) without Turkey and include a mechanism for kicking out troublemakers in the future.

How do you spell February?

So you'd kick out one of the largest militaries on the planet for two mid sized countries? Gee guy, don't think that's very smart

Turkey is strategically and militarily vastly more valuable than Sweden or even Finland. Effectively controlling the Black Sea, projecting power into the Caucasus and Middle East is more important than "winning bigger" in the Baltic and North Sea.

Claiming to explain Turkiye’s NATO membership history but not mentioning the sacrifices and 890 casualities from Turkish army during Korea war, can be explained by malevolence or ignorance… you pick one.

some misinformation. First of all, you said Turkey doesn't fit nato however, you didn't tell the wars Turkey was in to give large support to nato. Korean war etc. You didn't tell that USA refused giving patriot air defense then Turkey purchased air defence from Russia. yet Turkey is not the first nato that pruchased russian system. Greece got the same air defence system from Russia and nobody tells anything. Moreover, where potantial Turkey-Russia war just a few years ago. You didn't even mention plane was shot by Turkey. Plus, Proxy wars between Russia and Turkey again You did not mention. In Armenia, Syria, Libya. Turkey had proxy war with Russia. You don't know anything mate sorry. Just read all of sources if you can Thanks

_The Ottoman and Russian Empire had fought an impressive 10 wars over a periode of 300 years._ Sweden and Denmark: Hold our mjöd/mjød!

I think this video greatly underestimates the many reasons Turkey and the western powers have long been natural allies, and that is because Russia is absolutely determined to conquer Constantinople, and it could do so easily if it had Ukraine in its pocket. And, despite being mainly Muslim, Turkey has a LOT in common culturally with the western democracies, since it is one.

It's an interesting one, and I have to confess when Turkey started making a fuss about this the thought did cross my mind! Sweden and Finland joining benefits the rest of the alliance as much as keeping Turkey as a member, and in terms of long-term political outlook they're both far more closely aligned with the rest of the alliance than Turkey is too. But this isn't some sort of high school cool kids gang and the minute a member gets kicked out for exercising its right to object to a new member, which is enshrined in the articles of the alliance then the whole thing just falls apart. What's the point of having rules if you're going to kick member nations out because the rules make it inconvenient for them to be in? Who's to say if, for example, Poland gets attacked, we won't just kick them out too because we don't fancy a war right now, thanks? And look at it from Turkey's point of view - they've been in it since the very beginning and have been ready to come to the aid of the rest of the alliance if called upon (Well, more or less ready 😂). If Sweden and Finland want to join, well, they've had 70 years to do it and they only want to join now that they're worried about getting attacked. They weren't all that interested in defending the other NATO members when they weren't in much danger themselves.

Simply put, kicking Turkey out of NATO will weaken the alliance's might greatly. Turkey is the 2nd largest contributor and 5th largest army in NATO. It will be a huge win for Russia as they try to rope in Turkey against NATO forces near Turkish border. Russia may also transfer nukes to Turkey as a counterbalance to NATO's expansionism. It's not a stretch to say that Turkey is more valuable that Sweden and Finland combined

Who is trying to instigate NATO to kick out Turkey to admit Sweden and Finland, NATO can add in Sweden and Finland without kicking out any country, period

Turkey was strategic NATO ally in 1960's...... but that was before Erdoğan and the Kurdish issue.

Imagine NATO kicking out Turkey because Turkey has a terrorist problem from NATOs New prospects. Lol the group that you signed up to protect you kicking you out and recruiting your abuser 😂

Hungary is also another nato member who did not sanction Russia , but You said Turkey is only one..

That would be like giving up on the shield and choosing to counter Russians with a bare sword.

I want the best for my country and he wants Turkey to leave NATO and enter the Shanghai cooperation organization.

Now its Istanbul, not Constantinople...

First of all, we were involved in the Syrian war, we fought with our soldiers because an additional 5 million refugees would come to our country from Idlib. We are already looking at a lot of refugees, the addition of new ones would affect us sociologically and economically very, very badly. Assad and Russia were forcibly moving the dissident indigenous people to our border, so many people, changing the established order would affect us badly. We got involved in the war to preserve the status. The fall of Idlib meant 5 million refugees, this would be a problem not only for us but also for Europe, because it is obvious that not all of them will stay here.The same day, Russia struck our military convoy and 34 of our soldiers were martyred. They didn't even give us time to take our wounded and they closed the airspace. Despite Russia closing its airspace, Turkey decided on a military operation and the "spring shield operation" began. We disguised the Bayraktar TB2s with the Koral jammer and destroyed the targets. Our f16s hit targets using guided missiles from our own airspace without crossing the border because Russia had closed its airspace. Data shown as casualties are like 2500 soldiers these are the Iranian revolutionary militia and russian mercenary wagners. In this way, Idlib did not fall and the refugees there did not clog our borders. They continued their lives in their own countries. I would like to tell you about the Libya issue. We signed a maritime continental shelf agreement with the legitimate government in Libya in order to determine our borders in the Mediterranean. But the Russian-backed Haftar administration said that it does not recognize our continental shelf. We got into a difficult situation regarding our continental shelf in the Mediterranean. Greece also became one with Haftar and turned against us in the Mediterranean. Two NATO countries were on the brink of war in 2020. The only way to diplomatically salvage this situation was for the legitimate government to survive. We also provided military support to the government recognized by the United Nations, our soldiers went there and fought, just like Syria, we used Bayraktar tb2s there. Likewise, the airspace of the region was closed by Russia, but we stopped the general Haftar by preventing the tb2s from appearing on the radars. We helped both sides form a government with no war elections, the agreement with us would be valid. Finally, Azerbaijan doesn't need much words for this, Azerbaijan's personal issue is a personal issue for us. Azerbaijan is an Oghuz Turkic nation and we are two countries of the same race, from the same blood for centuries, it is very normal for us to help when they need help. Turkey may be a NATO country, but it has waged proxy wars with Russia for its personal interests. Ukraine, after seeing this, approached us and wanted to buy Bayraktar tb2s. They bought from us the tools They use most effectively in the field at the moment. Not only did they buy, the technology transfer agreement was signed, they wanted to produce together. I can explain it briefly like this, I hope you read it. In short, while our country was implementing a policy of diplomatic balance with Russia, it was fighting proxy wars in the background this is why it is used in so many wars. Now you will say why Russia supported the Haftar, let me explain it too. The emergence of hydrocarbon and natural gas reserves in the Mediterranean is not a good development for a natural gas exporting country like Russia. One way or another, Europe has a dependency on Russia on natural gas and the Russians make money in this way. If the reserves in the Mediterranean went to Europe by a longer route, not our border, it would be more expensive than Russian gas, and the Europeans would not want to use expensive gas or they would continue to use cheap Russian gas. That's why the Russians provoked Greece against us. This deadlock was very important for their natural gas trade. That's why 2 NATO countries came back from the brink of war.

9:48 Turkey is not in need of some military protection though 10:04 number of personnel is one of the worst metric to describe the power of the armed forces. North Korea has millions and still completely suck.

Probably could but why to? Turkey is a great ally. It's army and geographical position is important for NATO.

Didn't Turkey invade Greece, both nato members?

When Korea war stalled, Turkey help please. When genocide happened in Bosnia because Dutch couldn't keep Serbs away or in Kosovo War, Turkey help please. When invading Iraq, Turkey please let us use airfields. When escaping Afghanistan while people falling down from planes, Turkey please hold airport away form Taliban. When Russia attacks Ukraine, Turkey please help Ukraine with drones. Turkey did more than any other nation for NATO yet this video claims it doesn't align well.

A connected question: could they decide to leave on their own? I think that's been a question repeated every few years the last decade or two.

I ended up watching 12mins video to just listen last 40s

Sounds weird to me that the Americans wouldn't leave a route in there (in the charters) for getting rid of a troublesome member.

The yellow bar under the add is a great addition thank you 😊

Another point, this is an incredibly Eurocentric view. It is not just Turkey, but USA who is interested in the Middle East affairs. Europe's lack of desire to get involved in the world issues is more of an issue to be discussed on why Europe ended up being a light weight on world politics while being an economic giant.

Hmmm, NATO membership or Russian alliance? Ask any nation (except possibly China) which borders Russia ....

Spot on

This is just another example that military power gives you lots of advantage in politics. It does not matter if you are right or wrong. If you have military power you are considered right. (with asterisk)

Why isn´t the Crimean war (1853-1856) on that list? It should be 11 russo-turkish wars

Well there is the matter of the Treaty of Vienna on the subject of treaties and a finding of "material breach" where a member who no longer holds the goals and values of other members on a treaty organization could be be subject to suspension or ejection by the other members. Setting aside the Treaty of Vienna argument there is nothing to prevent 28 of the current NATO members from voluntarily leaving under the current NATO treaty agreement (with Turkey and Hungary being left behind) and joining a new security organization along with Finland and Sweden to form a new 30 member alliance dedicated to mutual defense and security. The new organization could be called the Atlantic Treaty Organization (aka ATO) and assume the current functions of NATO. They would also need to include some new treaty agreement provisions for suspension/ expulsion to prevent future Turkey/Hungary behavior scenarios. Turkey's isolation would be fairly complete and Hungary could hangout with their troublesome Serb neighbors while the rest of the 1st World in Europe and North America moves forward.

Why doesn't NATO change the rule of entry to a 2/3 majority instead? Same with EU or any organization that requires unanimous approval should change to a 2/3 majority because you don't want the tail wagging the dog!

Kick out the biggest standing military in europe over a minor dispute? Not really.

You failed to mention the US nukes stationed in Turkey in the 60s. The reason for the Soviets attempting to station nukes in Cuba. Finally being removed as part of de-escalation after the Cuban missile crisis.

They should kick out turkey from NATO, like literally the NATO beliefs and turkey is quite opposite

I sure hope so.

Turkey condemned the actions of Russia and defined this whole debacle as war ever since it started. Turkey is committed to the Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity since 2016. Get your facts in order!

Right now Ukraine need Turkey as a "silent partner" !! They deliver stuff to Ukraine and do not let Russia fly over turkish land and russian ships are not allowed to pass bosphorus strait Turkey is more important than ever.

They're far more likely to change the way NATO accepts new members, than kick turkey out. Turkey is so geographically important, they couldn't afford to remove them from the alliance

All I heard was a guy bitch about Turkey for twenty minutes for him in the end to say "there is nothing we can do"

The Turkish military launched an operation against the PKK yesterday. The most effective weapon seized in the operation is the Swedish, made AT 4 anti tank missile. The serial number of this anti tank is known. This is a Swedish made weapon. What do you want from the Turks now?

Short answer: no it can’t. Turkey’s position is even more strategic and it could easily become an adversary to NATO if it is ousted. Meanwhile, Finland and Sweden are NATO members in all but name. There’s already alignment and cooperation with its members, but without the obligation from a mutual defense agreement (Article 5). Kicking Turkey out in favor of Finland and Sweden doesn’t make strategic sense, regardless of how aligned they are with the west. That said, I hope they reach a compromise with Turkey and NATO accepts the two new members to thwart any new Russian expansion attempt. That would probably bring the alliance to its final size: Switzerland and Austria will remain neutral in their cozy location, the reaming Balkan states are too unstable, Ireland will be the last potential member (albeit improbable).

There have been some big oil and gas reserves found off Cyprus and Turkey is one of the countries planning to develop this resource. If they are a big as indicated, Turkey would no longer need to buy oil and gas from Russia, which would be a big improvement in their international balance of payments and a big boost for their economy.

Washington will certainly say no to that. The Istanbul Strait is the key to control the Russian Black Sea fleet. In the end, it’s probably the US who will have to give Turkey money to make Turkey agree to Finland and Sweden’s NATO’ applications. TBH, I was quite delighted back in 2020 when Macron angered Erdogan.

The now Swedish goverment has ties with the YPK because they wanted a extra vote to be in power. He has also demanded some things for the government to do to keep his vote.

I would take that trade. Sweden and Finland have strong militaries and recognize the concept of everyone in NATO 'being in it together' If Poland or Lithuania were attacked they would "get it" and immediately be at the ready and on board with NATO decisions. Turkey is in NATO also to deter Russia, but to deter Russia from attacking Turkey only, not so much the other way around. If Russia attacked Lithuania, Turkey would be the first to say "Well that doesn't really affect Turkey, our economy already stinks, and we are far to intermingled economically and politically with Russia to get involved" They play both sides of the fence almost as part of their culture, and if you try to do something for the common good (like admitting Sweden and Finland) they are the first to pipe up for an opportunity to say "What's in it for me?" As stated well in the video, Russia would love to snatch the Bosporous straight. Turkey is in NATO to prevent that but it is kind of a one way street for them. We can't even integrate NATO weapons into Turkey because anything Turkey has access to the Russians somehow immediately have, and a good chunk of Turkey's military is Russian weapons which aren't compatible in many aspects.