Link (Helps Relations)
Removing the nuclear weapons would be popular with Turkey and improve Turkey’s relations with neighboring states
Clamond and Ingram 9 (Claudine, Southeast Asian Security Analyst, Paul, BASIC, “Politics around US tactical nuclear weapons in European host states,” British American Security Information Council, http://www.basicint.org/gtz/gtz11.htm) MJ
There is a rising sentiment amongst the population for the removal of US nuclear weapons from Turkish territory. In a recent survey, more than half the respondents stated that they are against nuclear weapons being stationed in Turkey. Almost 60% of the Turkish population would support a government request to remove the nuclear weapons from their country, and 72% said they would support an initiative to make Turkey a nuclear-free zone. There may be several causes behind this sentiment, including the Iraq War, Turkish relations with neighboring states, budget expenditure and the moral concern over nuclear weapons. The historic precedence of Greece, a NATO member and Turkey's historic rival, ending its commitment to nuclear sharing in NATO may have further strengthened this tendency. There have been public expressions of resentment towards the US military presence in Turkey ever since the lead up to the US war with Iraq. The United States insisted on the government allowing American troops to use Turkey as a staging post, despite overwhelmingly antiwar Turkish public and political opinion. Limited permission was granted after heavy debates and delay in the Turkish parliament.
Link (Hurts Turkey-US, Helps Turkey-Russo)
US presence in the Middle East and Turkey hurts US-Turkey relations and significantly boosts Turkey-Russia relations
Oku 5, (Asim, 12.05.2005 Turkey-Russia Relations Dynamics Asim Oku, AIA Turkish section. The 90s: from "image of enemy" to "feeble partner" http://www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=71) WDK
Russia and Turkey today share much deeper understanding of geopolitical issues. After the intrusion of the USA in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the increase of the American military presence in the Eastern and Southern Europe, both states demonstrate obvious anti-American shift in their policy. Turkey aspires to enter the EU with its aversion to "US Hegemony", while Russia tries to strengthen ties with France and Germany – the principal conductors of the anti-American policy in Europe. Russia is extremely concerned about the loss of influence in Ukraine and Georgia, and Turkey is worried by the attempts to restrain its presence in the Balkans. Both countries emphasize their "Eurasian nature" (this phrase belongs to the ambassador of Russia in Turkey Alexander Lebedev), are dissatisfied with their minor role in the world, and look for the new allies in Asia, approaching Iran, China and India. Relations between Ankara and Damascus improved to a great extent after the Turkish Justice and Development Party came to power Kremlin also revives its "special relations" with the Syrian regime in economic and military sphere. Both Turkey and Russia refused to support the US military operation in Iraq in 2003. Growing concurrence of interests between Turkey and Russia leads to the signing, in 2001 in New York, of the "Eurasian cooperation agreement". Ankara in a pointed manner stays out of the US and NATO attempts to "entrench" on the Russian borders. In return Russia supports Turkish position on Cyprus. Frank anti-American moods dominate in the intellectual and political elite of both countries ("Edinaya Rossiya" - United Russia and Turkish Justice and Development Party). Both countries gradually chill off the cooperation with Israel – the main US ally in the Middle East, while simultaneously building partnership with Israel's sworn enemy - Syria. Both Ankara and Moscow indefatigably repeat that they "aspire only to defend their national interests". In the ''real politic'' it is expressed by the attempts to regain influence, which both countries possessed throughout the blossoming era of the empires: the Russian - the Soviet and the Ottoman. With regard of the aforesaid, there is a tendency between the parties to coordinate the opposition to Washington and to create the Eurasian alignment to ''counterbalance'' the American "Atlantism".
US-Turkey relations trade off with Turkey-Russo relations, this seriously damages the Caucus pipelines
Enghdal 9, (F William, Apr 16, 2009. Editor for Asia Times, Middle East, http://www.atime s.com/atimes/Middle_East/KD16Ak01.html)
Turkey is the key link in this complex game of geopolitical balance of power between Washington and Moscow. If Turkey decides to collaborate with Russia, Georgia's position becomes very insecure and Azerbaijan's possible pipeline route to Europe is blocked. If Turkey decides to cooperate with Washington and at the same time reaches a stable agreement with Armenia under US guidance, Russia's entire position in the Caucasus is weakened and an alternative route for natural gas to Europe becomes available, reducing Russian leverage against Western Europe.
Russia-Turkey and Turkey-US relations are based on zero sum, trade off is certain
Torbakov 8, (Igor, THE GEORGIA CRISIS AND RUSSIA-TURKEY RELATIONSPublished in the United States by The Jamestown Foundation http://www.jamestown. org/uploads/medi a/Georg iaCrisisTorbakov.pdf) WDK
One cannot fail to notice that Russian planners view the Caucasus Pact blueprint in general and Russia-Turkey relations in particular through the prism of a zero-sum game with the Americans. As the influential Kommersant newspaper put it in a recent commentary, the most important feature of the CSCP is that it “will allow Moscow and Ankara to strengthen their positions in the Caucasus thereby weakening Washington’s influence in the region.”
Share with your friends: