AEIdeas
Secretary of State Antony Blinken may have denied any deal to trade Turkey F-16s in exchange for the lifting of Turkey’s veto on Sweden’s NATO accession, but no one told the White House that. Not only has President Joe Biden alluded to just such a deal, but also National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan has apparently outlined the quid pro quo to key Congressional leaders.
On the surface, such a trade may seem both straightforward and logical: Turkey wants F-16s, the United States wants Sweden in NATO. Turkey has the ability to greenlight Sweden’s accession.
Biden and Sullivan may want to claim credit for a deal and bask in the glow of success, but it would be an illusion: Sweden’s accession under such circumstances would be a strategic disaster.
Consider:
- The deal would reward President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s blackmail. Not only will Erdogan hold NATO hostage again, but other countries will also follow suit. In the past, Washington assumed NATO members would try to do the right thing; in the future, various governments will look at looming votes as an opportunity to win the lottery.
- Sweden’s accession would be welcome, but its symbolic importance is minor. More important is European unity in the face of Russian aggression. That unity exists whether or not Sweden joins NATO. Sweden might just as easily act in concert with NATO without submitting to Turkish blackmail.
- Nothing Sweden brings to NATO would be a game-changer. Certainly, Sweden’s handful of diesel submarines would be welcome, but they do not offer NATO a capability that would significantly change the operational environment. Finland is another matter: not only does it border Russia, but it also has more artillery pieces than the United Kingdom, France, or Germany.
- The price Turkey demands from Sweden erodes the quality of Sweden’s democracy. It would be far better for the White House to encourage Turkey to adopt Swedish democracy than for it to encourage Sweden to bend toward Turkish autocracy. It is bad enough Turkey represses Kurdish identity; it should not demand Sweden do the same.
- Upgrading Turkey’s F-16 fleet will do little to enhance NATO. Turkey does not use its jet fighters for NATO’s defense or to preserve regional stability; rather, it consistently uses its F-16s to bomb Syrian Kurds, Iraqi Yezidis, and threaten Greek islands. Biden and Sullivan should carefully consider both whether a photo-op welcoming Sweden into NATO is worth increasing the danger of an intra-NATO military clash or whether NATO can even survive such a fight.
Make no mistake: One day, NATO should welcome Sweden as a full member, but timing and circumstances matter. Congress is a co-equal branch of government. Its leaders—both Democrat and Republican—should balk at White House pressure to accede to a bad deal and a counterproductive quid pro quo.
A far better response would be to tell Sullivan that Congress will disallow new F-16s or upgrades to Turkey until Erdogan is gone and Turkey’s behavior changes. If that means tabling Sweden’s NATO accession, so be it. Plan B might be greater military cooperation between Sweden, the United States, and key NATO members. Such a response would mean all the military capability, none of the blackmail, and a more stable Europe.
