Turkish President Erdogan Takes Center Stage at NATO Summit

As President Trump makes his way to Ankara for a NATO summit, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan again finds himself at the heart of alliance dynamics. Trump has referred to Erdogan as a “friend” and a “respected leader,” a nod that underscores the ongoing discussions about defense cooperation between Turkey and the U.S., especially amid Turkey’s long-standing push for enhanced military ties.

Erdogan’s current status is quite notable. Once seen as a challenging ally due to Turkey’s purchase of Russian-made S-400 missile systems in 2019, the shifting geopolitical landscapes—exemplified by the war in Ukraine and instability in the Middle East—have made Turkey increasingly indispensable to NATO. This complicates the alliance’s ability to isolate Turkey politically.

Yet, Erdogan is not easily pinned down. Analysts suggest his political identity is fluid; he seems to reshape it to achieve his primary goal—maintaining power. What is he, really? An Islamist? A nationalist? A partner to Western allies or Russia? A person with authoritarian tendencies?

Experts emphasize that Erdogan embodies all these identities at different times. Gönur Tol from the Middle East Institute highlights his pragmatic nature, insisting that he’s primarily a populist rather than an ideologue.

Turkey’s Recent Security Operations

Just ahead of the NATO summit, Turkey announced the arrest of over 200 suspects, including those believed to have ties to ISIS.

For more than twenty years, Erdogan has governed Turkey, evolving from a mayor with Islamist roots to a reformer, then to a nationalist figure, and now, a key player within NATO, particularly from Trump’s perspective. Supporters argue he has restored Turkey’s global standing, while critics claim his actions have undermined democracy, jailing rivals and stifling dissent. What stands out, according to analysts, is Erdogan’s instinct for survival over any particular ideology.

Political Evolution and Support Base

Beginning his political journey within Türkiye’s Islamist framework, Erdogan was educated in a religious school and gained prominence through the Islamist National Outlook movement. When he founded the Justice and Development Party (AKP) in 2001, he transitioned away from radicalism, positioning himself as a “conservative democrat” favoring economic reform and Western ties. This shift attracted a mix of liberal and centrist supporters initially.

“He often articulated that he was no longer an Islamist, but rather a conservative democrat,” Tol noted, suggesting this branding was quite effective.

During his early years in office, he effectively notably changed Turkey’s economy and raised his popularity. However, following the Arab Spring in 2011, Erdogan began to frame himself as a defender of political Islam while confronting Western powers, especially regarding foreign policies in Syria and relations with Israel.

Critics argue that his anti-Western rhetoric goes beyond mere politics, marking a significant shift—especially concerning allegations against the U.S. for supporting groups Turkey deems terrorists.

The Shift in Foreign Relations

Recently, Erdogan appears to be recalibrating his international stance. After years spent criticizing the West, he seems to be moving towards repairing relations with both the U.S. and Europe. This pivot is perhaps fueled by Turkey’s increasing strategic relevance stemming from currently complicated defense relationships, particularly surrounding the S-400s and NATO’s operations.

Turkey commands a pivotal position with its control over the Bosporus and its large military presence in NATO. Recently, former U.S. ambassador James Jeffrey noted that Turkey plays a crucial role, especially regarding its support for Ukraine against Russian aggression.

Yet, as Tol points out, Erdogan’s past anti-Western sentiments highlight his unpredictability and suggest that his current alignment with NATO is just another instance of his political maneuvering.

Domestic Criticism and Authoritarian Trends

Concerns about Erdogan’s administration have increased, with human rights organizations alleging that he uses Turkey’s NATO role as a facade to intensify repression against dissent. Reports indicate a concerning rise in authoritarianism under his leadership, marked by constitutional reforms that consolidated power and jailed opponents.

Turkey is said to have a prison population that far exceeds its official capacity, raising alarms about human rights violations. As the importance of Turkey grows, NATO allies have been quieter about these human rights issues.

In the end, Tol remarks that Erdogan’s domestic strategy seems largely focused on his longevity in power rather than any coherent ideology linking his policies.

As President Trump embarks on this significant trip, it may provide insights into what makes Erdogan one of NATO’s most complex and unpredictable leaders.