{
"authors": [
"Marc Pierini"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe",
"Carnegie China",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [
"Turkey’s Transformation",
"Transatlantic Cooperation",
"China’s Foreign Relations",
"China and the Developing World"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"Europe",
"Türkiye"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Turkey’s planned new canal and a missile defense system both send the message that Turkey will go its own way, swiftly and irrespective of the country’s international environment and commitments.
Source: Hurriyet Daily News
At first sight, there is little in common between the “Kanal Istanbul” project and Turkey’s purchase of Chinese missiles. Yet, these two projects, both still in their early stages, are very telling of Turkey’s willingness to go its own way, irrespective of the consequences.
Kanal Istanbul is a new artificial waterway to be dug between the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara. Officially, the project is justified by the inherent dangers of transporting petroleum products, natural gas and chemicals through a city of 15 million inhabitants.
Experts have already signaled some of the potential consequences for two of the globe’s most fragile seas. Levels of salinity and oxygen, the transfer of pollutants, marine life, currents, sea temperature and underground waters would all be affected by the new canal.On a regional level, six countries bordering the Black Sea and the Mediterranean would be affected by the project: Bulgaria, Georgia, Greece, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine. In addition, Turkey is bound by several international environmental and maritime agreements on the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, such as the Montreux Convention.
On a national level, the construction of such a major piece of infrastructure would have immense economic and social consequences on the price of land (due to speculation), the environment and population displacement.
The project therefore needs solid national and international consultations before being put to tender, which was announced on Sept. 12. Bypassing such consultations may result in another episode of internal tensions and most certainly in an international dispute.
The forthcoming Chinese missile purchase seems an altogether different issue. Officially, the choice of a Chinese system over the competing US and French-Italian offers is justified by considerations of price and technology transfer. As long as the Chinese-built system would be operated in a stand-alone mode, there is little to object to.
Turkey, however, is a member of NATO, and as such, is bound by NATO “Smart Defense” and “Connected Forces” policies and the 2012 Chicago Summit decisions. The two key concepts are “Integration” and “Interoperability”. On Oct. 10, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said: “It is … of utmost importance within an alliance that not only our armed forces, but also our military equipment can work and operate together. And I’m confident that the Turkish authorities are aware of that.” While it is technically possible to make a Chinese missile defense system integrated in and inter-operable with NATO’s systems, this will not happen for the compelling reason that the risk of Chinese infiltration is too high. It is that simple.
What is more, the Chinese company involved, CPMEIC, is under U.S. sanctions because of its dealings with Iran, North Korea and Syria. There is also an irony in Ankara asking NATO in August 2012 for a missile shield (which has been deployed since January 2013 in three provinces), only to turn its back on NATO for a new missile defense architecture. Similarly, there is questionable consistency in building a stand-alone missile defense while participating in NATO’s Missile Defense System which includes a radar based in eastern Turkey.
Turkey is now confronted with two choices: it can either reverse its decision for consistency’s sake or it can continue and distance itself from NATO’s policies. It’s not a comfortable dilemna.
But what do a new canal and a missile defense system have in common?
Both projects send the message that Turkey will go its own way, swiftly and irrespective of the country’s international environment and commitments. They illustrate a mix of haste and hubris. Were they to materialize, the two projects would generate significant turbulence in their respective spheres.
As a result, Turkey would lose more of its international standing. “Precious loneliness” would be on the rise. Is that what the international situation warrants?
This article was originally published in Hurriyet Daily News.
Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.
Vrinda Sahai
The India-Pakistan conflict that played out between May 6 and May 10, 2025, offers several military lessons. This article presents key takeaways from Operation Sindoor and breaks down how India’s preparations shaped the outcome and what more is needed to strengthen future readiness.
Dinakar Peri
This book offers a comprehensive analysis of India's evolving relationship with sovereignty in a complex global order. Moving beyond conventional narratives, it examines how the sovereignty principle shapes India's behavior across four critical domains—from traditional military power to contemporary data governance.
Rudra Chaudhuri, Nabarun Roy
On July 30, 2025, the United States announced 25 percent tariffs on Indian goods. While diplomatic tensions simmered on the trade front, a cosmic calm prevailed at the Sriharikota launch range. Officials from NASA and ISRO were preparing to launch an engineering marvel into space—the NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), marking a significant milestone in the India-U.S. bilateral partnership.
Tejas Bharadwaj
This article examines the scale and impact of Chinese IUU fishing operations globally and identifies the nature of the challenge posed by IUU fishing in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). It also investigates why existing maritime law and international frameworks have struggled to address this growing threat.
Ajay Kumar, Charukeshi Bhatt