The world sits with its eyes peeled anxiously, fearing the imminent invasion of Ukraine as 100,000 Russian troops surround the country. As of Jan. 20, United States officials have confirmed that U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration has now given permission to several NATO allies to send weaponry, including anti-tank weapons, to Ukraine. Speculating on Russian President Vladimir Putin’s next steps, Biden said "my guess is he will move in." Through his comments, Putin has given similar indications. While the U.S. tries to show NATO as strong, such a thing could not be further from the truth. An irrefutable truth that Western mainstream media refuses to face is that we would not be in this situation if it wasn’t for Washington's treatment of Turkey over the last two administrations. The U.S.' undermining of Turkish security needs allowed Turkey to be pulled toward Russia’s sphere of influence and the effect on NATO’s credibility has been devastating.

The credible military deterrent that NATO once was is no longer as strong; Putin sees nothing stopping him and no reason not to pursue his desires to expand Russia’s sphere of influence in retaliation for the historical expansion of NATO's presence. Putin is a man of power and opportunity. The simple reality is that he is aggressive at this time because he can be. NATO was formed with the foundational purpose of deterring Russian aggression, specifically through Article 5 of the Washington Treaty that states the obligation of all member states to respond if one is attacked. When its members were more cooperative, this was actually a credible way to stop Russia from bulldozing its neighbors.

Why NATO is weakening

Much ink has been spilled in the mainstream media about why NATO’s credibility is weakening; commonly stated reasons are Chinese power expansion and former U.S. President Donald Trump’s cost-cutting isolationism as leaving the alliance weak. Much of this, however, is a distraction as analysts know that Russia considers little other than pure military power and hard geostrategic realities. This is why Turkey, given its location and military power, is so critical.

Turkey, despite being the second-largest army in NATO, has had its vital national security interests repeatedly undermined by the U.S. Under Barack Obama’s presidency, the U.S. chose to back YPG terrorists in Syria – a group that American officials have openly acknowledged is affiliated with the PKK terrorist organization, which is on the U.S. State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations. Under the Trump administration, this move led to major tension between Turkish and American militaries in northern Syria, and U.S. officials later shamelessly accused Turkey of ethnic cleansing when Ankara sent troops to clear the U.S.-empowered threat to its national security. Turkey was also refused the sale of U.S. Patriot missiles, embarrassing from a U.S. strategic perspective because it caused Turkey’s defense systems to be inundated with Russian S-400s. Not only did the U.S. sanction Turkey for pursuing an alternative to what it was refused, but Washington also tried to reverse this strategic catastrophe by reneging and offering Patriot missiles when it was far too late – a clear admission of their mistake.

Miscalculation costs a lot

One needs to look at the crisis from Russia’s perspective and simply ask oneself how this appears to a very calculating Putin. American strategists ought to be ashamed of themselves for allowing this to happen; they have succeeded in pushing away one of NATO’s most critical members into Russia’s sphere of influence and impugning the very essence of their strategic credibility. In Putin’s eyes, now the enemy factions have fought among themselves long enough for him to rest assured that there will be no collective NATO response to his aggression. What other than the encouragement of Russian military aggression can the West expect when it undermines the unity of the alliance that was founded with the purpose of preventing it?

U.S. officials are completely out of touch with reality and are frantically working to reassure the globe that America is in the driver’s seat when it no longer is. Biden is scrambling for a solution and threatening sanctions, but we know that this is a slap on the wrist at best. Not only does Putin carry little real accountability to his population, but the resulting economic hardship might only invigorate the spirits of Putin’s loyal supporters and military. U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken is in Europe trying to convince the world that NATO is strong and united, something the Russians likely take as a joke at this point. U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris gave an interview for USA Today where she repeated the deep care the U.S. supposedly has for Ukrainian sovereignty, but where was this deep care for the sovereignty of NATO member Turkey when the U.S. was arming terrorists on its border? The more U.S. officials pretend to hold dear the mission of NATO and its unity, the more they damage their own credibility.

The only way that this crisis could have been halted would be through preemption, which would only have been achieved by the U.S. treating Turkey like a real ally. This is because Russia does not see the world through the neoliberal lens that the U.S. does; rather it is much more in touch with the traditional realities of global politics where the strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must. Try to imagine Russia attempting such a move with U.S.-allied Turkey on its border, poised and ready to respond. Putin is a realist and understands that he cannot afford to sacrifice too much financially or in terms of human life in this conflict; hence why he has awaited this moment.

Why did the U.S. then undermine its bilateral ties with Turkey? Many of Washington's reasons for turning its back on Ankara have been for issues of so-called human rights; however, Turkey has been taking necessary action to defend its security, and Western definitions of human rights do not consider Turkey’s unique security conditions. U.S. policymakers, who have become too comfortable with their superpower status, have clearly thought it suitable to sacrifice hard power and spheres of influence for less strategically critical issues of human rights. This approach meant simultaneously ignoring that Russia continues to adhere to a Hobbesian worldview despite the West seeing itself as above traditional realism. The effects of this strategic ignorance and misguided arrangement of priorities are taking their toll amid the pending invasion of Ukraine.

Did U.S. officials not know that Turkey being pushed toward Russia would be strategically disastrous? Of course they knew, but it’s likely the case that they were accustomed to previous Turkish administrations and saw Turkey as too weak to back the U.S. The reality is that Turkey is no puppet of the West. The country is finding its own strength, independence and identity once again. Gone are the days of Ankara’s dependence on Washington. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is showing the world a new strong Turkey that the West cannot bear to see, a Turkey that is now strong enough to stand up for its interests militarily and otherwise. If the U.S.’ stance on NATO unity is sincere then the U.S. will have to offer Turkey real incentives to come back into the fold rather than expecting it to submit to the whims and wishes of Washington. At this rate, however, the U.S. should prepare to say goodbye to the indispensable and irresistible power status that it once enjoyed.