Erdogan-Meloni, Italian-Turkish engagement focused on defence

The 4th Turkey-Italy intergovernmental summit was concluded on April 29 in Rome, where a large group from Ankara, led by Erdogan, and the Ministers of Foreign Affairs Hakan Fidan, Family and Social Services Mahinur Özdemir Göktaş, Culture and Tourism Mehmet Nuri Ersoy, National Defense Yaşar Güler, Industry and Technology Mehmet Fatih Kaçır, Commerce Ömer Bolat, Youth and Sports Osman Askin Bak, along with many businessmen, arrived to meet their Italian counterparts.

In summary, the two sides agreed to further strengthen their relations at all levels, with many references to defense, industrial defense cooperation, foreign policy mainly in the Turkish region. A very clear example of how Italy “talked” to Turkey, not in general terms but very specifically and on points that are of critical bilateral interest. But let’s see in some areas what was agreed in practice between Tayyip Erdogan and Giorgia Meloni:

Defense-defense industry

The joint statement emphasizes the need to strengthen the NATO-EU partnership, with Turkey “participating” in both, as a NATO member and as a candidate member for entry into the EU. Although the latter is unlikely to happen (all of Europe knows this, regardless of whether it is openly stated), Turkey is using it in every way to extract – from its supposed accession to the EU – steps to participate in European processes. Important here is that Italy accepted a formulation for cooperation on “multifaceted challenges emanating from the Southern flank of the Alliance, especially in the fight against terrorism”. Something that serves Turkey, which insists in all international forums to emphasize that it is threatened by the “Kurdish terrorists of the PKK and the YPG”.

In the same vein, bilateral “counter-terrorism consultations”, mutual legal assistance and joint actions will continue. All this with a Turkey that openly supports Hamas…

The need to strengthen the European defense industry is also emphasized, in which Turkey is now actively participating, following the cooperation agreement between the Turkish Baykar and the Italian defense giant Leonardo, for the joint development and production of unmanned aerial vehicles (a sector in which the Italian group is lagging behind and wants to make an appearance), while Baykar has already purchased the Italian Piaggio Aerospace. Thus, the official statement states that “…the parties recognized the fact that the defense industry plays a crucial role in both their current and future relations and, therefore, will continue to strengthen dialogue and cooperation in this area.”

Here, in the presence of the two leaders, Erdogan and Meloni, the final signing of the cooperation between the two defense companies took place, as a prelude to Turkey’s “entry” into the Italian defense industry and then, with this as a springboard into the European one. Especially when the large ReArm Europe package is expected, with loans initially of 100 billion euros, and potentially up to 150 billion, plus the many orders that have already begun in all defense industries from EU countries, in a frenzy of rearmament.

Following the above, the “14th bilateral defense industry cooperation meeting” will also take place within the year, technical and commercial meetings and so on, for even greater synergy.

Libya-Syria-Middle East

For these three countries/zones, there is a special reference in the joint statement: where for Libya, mutual support for the Arab country for “territorial integrity, stability, sovereignty and political unity” is agreed, i.e. the obvious. For Syria, the same is also said, but support for the country’s economy, the easing of international sanctions and cooperation for “supporting Syria in the fight against terrorism and extremism” are added. We reiterate here that these formulations serve Ankara more, as Italy may refer to ISIS, which is still active in Syria, but Turkey includes the Kurds in the same categorization. For the Middle East, we have a balance, as the joint effort for a ceasefire and the start of reconstruction in Gaza is declared, as well as support for the “two-state solution, Palestine-Israel”, according to internationally accepted standards.

Turkey and the European Union

Here we find the reference to what Ankara is really seeking – on a practical level – in its relations with the EU. With the official text stating that “…the sides agreed to coordinate their efforts to achieve concrete results in key areas, such as accelerating the Turkey-EU Visa Liberalization Dialogue, renewing cooperation on migration and strengthening cooperation against terrorism. The sides also stressed the urgent need for the modernization of the Turkey-EU Customs Union, which will have potential benefits for both sides”.

So Turkey seems to be securing Italy’s support to a considerable extent in promoting the above. Let us also say that both leaders referred to bilateral trade, which has exceeded 32 billion euros annually, and pledged to develop it with a medium-term goal of 40 billion. So the Rome-Ankara cooperation is based on a proven commercial relationship that is constantly growing (it was at 10 billion in 2019 alone), while the effort for mutual investments will be strengthened.

Other levels of joint actions

Italian-Turkish cooperation will expand, as stated in the relevant statements, to many more areas, such as the green transition, transport, rare earths, energy, in addressing irregular migration with reference to “…innovative solutions”, in combating religious intolerance, in cooperation in the Eastern Mediterranean, but here with reference to International Law for resolving maritime border disputes (this benefits Greece), and so on. Let us not forget that Italy and Turkey will co-organize the Euro 2032 football tournament, at a new level of convergence.

A dowry but not a wedding

The meeting ended with the signing of several memorandums of cooperation, as is customary, but there were -more importantly- several contacts between businessmen from both sides, which are ongoing.

The essence of the meeting, which took place three years after the previous one (it had been held in Ankara): A down-to-earth, ongoing rapprochement between two geographically “close” countries, which already have significant relations (Italy is in the top five of Turkey’s trading partners), where each side promoted its interests. Turkey is seeking more exports and investments and is now finding, through Italy, an “entrance” to the rapidly growing European defense market. Italy is asking in areas where it has significant interests, whether current or historical (i.e. Libya, the Middle East, the Mediterranean, partly Syria), to find a platform for understanding with the interventionist-extroverted Ankara there, which has already developed many footholds.

So there is an engagement, but it is not a marriage and a permanent commitment (how could it be in the volatile international environment…). Italy remains “neutral” in several points of friction, that is, giving only the typical international consensus formulations, but it certainly does not take a negative stance towards Ankara, nor does it show any willingness to raise issues with it… of behavior/democratic functioning, etc. as Germany does, for example. Pragmatism, that is, that echoes the “Trump spirit”, not unrelated to the effort that Giorgia Meloni is making to find her own paths of understanding with Washington, within the subversive style of the new resident of the White House. Thus, Italy… elegantly as usual, but without many flourishes, is building its relationship with Turkey, with a degree of autonomy from the rest of Europe and the institutional structure of the EU.

About the author

The Liberal Globe is an independent online magazine that provides carefully selected varieties of stories. Our authoritative insight opinions, analyses, researches are reflected in the sections which are both thematic and geographical. We do not attach ourselves to any political party. Our political agenda is liberal in the classical sense. We continue to advocate bold policies in favour of individual freedoms, even if that means we must oppose the will and the majority view, even if these positions that we express may be unpleasant and unbearable for the majority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *