Despite declining American hegemony and collapsing neoliberalism, acting in accordance with the religious and ethnic dividing policies is geopolitical suicide.
Donald Trump‘s “Big, Beautiful Bill,” which includes $5 trillion in public spending submitted to Congress, was approved by a 51–50 vote in the Senate on July 1, 2025, thanks to a vote by Vice President J.D. Vance, and became law on July 4. This law is directly related to the collapse of neoliberalism. Neoliberalism, which is the carrier of the system in the post-Cold War period, has worked through tools such as globalization, deregulation, and financialization. However, the pandemic, energy wars, supply chain issues and geopolitical tensions have ushered in a period in which the state is back on the scene.
Contrary to the “small state” mentality at the core of neoliberalism, Trump is increasing public investment and borrowing with $5 trillion in spending, and he is promoting “statist” policies with subsidies for defense, infrastructure and industry. This development shows that market discipline has given way to voter satisfaction. Neoliberalism, especially after 1980, led to a disproportionate power of finance capital. In 2024, the world economy is $110 trillion, while financial derivatives total $730 trillion. That is seven times the real economy. For example, for 100 million barrels of oil consumption, six billion barrels of virtual trade are returning. These financial assets are mostly controlled by U.S. banks, BlackRock, the Soros Foundation, Rothschild & Co, Palantir and the City of London etc. financial giants. This structure wants neoliberalism to continue. However, the U.S. administration aims to return to industry, promote production and reduce dependency like the Chinese model. The new law emphasizes the visible power of the state and becomes a symbol of the post-neoliberal era. Instead of shrinking the state and growing the economy, strategic economy and strong state are preferred. Major crises have always enlarged the state rather than the market. Today, in the West, too, the state has returned not only as a regulator, but also as an investor, a directive and, when necessary, an aggressive actor.
Why Did Neoliberalism Collapse?
After the OPEC crisis in the 1970s, the effectiveness of Keynesian policies declined. These crises accelerated the shift towards neoliberal policies in the United States and the United Kingdom. Neoliberalism, which rose under the leadership of Thatcher and Reagan in the 1980s, reached its strongest form until the 1990s with the free market, privatization, deregulation, financialization and globalization.
In the aftermath of the Cold War, neoliberalism set the economic and political groundwork for three generations with the promise of globalization and democratization. Although initially offering temporary successes such as economic growth, neoliberal policies have in the long run deepened inequality, weakened social safety nets, and set the stage for the 2008 global crisis. Neoliberal policies have eroded the middle class, led to an unprecedented concentration of wealth at the top, and an unprecedented injustice in income distribution.
In 2024, 45-50% of the world’s wealth was in the hands of the richest 1%. The five richest people had more wealth than 3.5 billion people combined. After the pandemic, the wealth of the rich 1% increased by more than $34 trillion. Neoliberalism has been deliberately promoted by big business and financial elites. Free trade agreements have weakened workers’ rights and strengthened multinational corporations. Low taxes and limited social spending worked in favor of capital. The deregulation of financial centers led to crises such as 2008. This process undermined the claim that the market would be self-regulating; State interventions have become inevitable.
After 2008, while the big banks were bailed out, people lost their jobs and homes, which created anger and insecurity. In the process combined with COVID-19, supply chain shocks and the Russia-Ukraine war, the neoliberal model has become questionable not only economically, but also politically and geopolitically. Inequalities, polarization and security threats constituted the fundamental ruptures that led to the end of neoliberalism.
States Are Beginning to Protect Themselves
At the height of neoliberalism in the 1990s and early 2000s, it was believed that every problem would be solved by the invisible hand of the market, that states would remain in the background, and that technocrats would find rational solutions to everything. However, after 2008, the opposite transformation took place. Countries that were supposed to develop with IMF prescriptions were left in debt, and the Western middle class, which believed that everything would become cheaper with free trade, became poorer. As the market collapsed, a political climate emerged that sanctified the state, prioritized the national interest, and said “my property, my security, my data.”
Image: Friedrich Hayek (CC BY-SA 3.0)
While populism and protectionism were the counterpart of globalization in the West, China and Russia in the East came to the fore with geopolitical moves that declared the legitimacy of the statist model. The golden age of globalization has begun to fade in the shadow of nation-states. Companies have shortened their supply chains governments have made self-sufficiency a priority in strategic areas. Major economies have declared economic security as part of national security. While there was a crisis in every field from masks to chips during the pandemic period, the West abandoned its globalist identity overnight and turned to nationalism. Even the IMF has started to support public investment and social spending after the pandemic. Policies that used to be criticized as “protectionism” were brought to the fore. Hayek and Friedman, the fathers of neoliberalism, may not have aimed at these outcomes directly, their vision was based on the ideal of individual freedom. However, this ideal turned into an order that opened up unlimited space for the owners of capital. This, in turn, increased social and political instability, paving the way for the rise of populism and authoritarian tendencies.
What Is Neoliberalism Giving Way to?
Neoliberalism appears to have collapsed ideologically, but it still retains its political influence. But state ownership is getting stronger. Expropriation in areas such as water, energy and transportation is on the agenda again. While the role of the state is gaining importance again with inflation and crises, discussions on the transition to the public model are spreading, even if democratic-socialist alternatives do not reach the hegemonic level. Leaders like Trump are abandoning the free market and turning to pro-capitalist nationalist policies. This indicates that neoliberal norms are being replaced by authoritarian and protectionist models.
Social democrats are also discussing more egalitarian, publicist economic models. China’s model of state capitalism and non-Western development paths are gaining legitimacy. Western-centered finance capitalism is being replaced by a hybrid structure in which state capitalism, digital surveillance, and technological control are intertwined. While this process continues, the US and the EU, backed by the power of finance capital, still claim global leadership, but China is getting closer to its goal of becoming the new center in technology and the financial system.
Countries such as Russia, India, Brazil and South Africa put their cards on the table. The increasing resistance to the US in the Global South and the alternative systems developed by China with digital payment systems are shaking the hegemony of the dollar. Although Trump has tried to put pressure on BRICS countries with tariffs between 10% and 40%, it is a remarkable result that only three agreements have emerged from the negotiations with 90 countries. Although Trump attacked it with great contempt, BRICS, which represents a population of 3.5 billion, reached 11 full members with the latest enlargement. At the same time, 69% of the trade between the 11 countries is carried out outside the US dollar.
On the other hand, global supply chains are polarized with new options. Energy markets are fragmenting. For example, new energy-mining cartels are forming between Russia, China, the Middle East and Africa. The fragmentation of globalization is turning transportation and energy lines into an area of competition and conflict. Transportation projects such as the Belt and Road, the Middle Corridor, the North-South and IMEC are turning into military and ideological fields rather than economic. Rare metals are becoming the dominant commodity in the geopolitical struggle with the role played by oil at the beginning of the 20th century.
On the other hand, institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO, the bastions of neoliberalism, are being dragged into a crisis of legitimacy. Regional currencies, bilateral trade, and alternative financial systems are on the rise. As the ideal of the “global citizen” recedes, nationalism and sovereignty return to the center of politics. Divisions within the EU are creating a post-Brexit domino effect. The free-market discourse is being rewritten, this time with government funding, subsidies and digital supervision. However, what remains unchanged in essence is the continued capacity of capital, which has a foam of 730 trillion dollars, to concentrate power and produce inequality. In the new era, global standards and institutions are weakening, and local rules and bilateral agreements are coming to the fore. Many countries trade in their own currencies. For example, even Egypt, which is under pressure from Israel and the United States, can switch to China’s CIPS system instead of the US-controlled international money transfer system SWIFT.
The Geopolitics of Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism was imposed not only as an economic model, but as a kind of geopolitical ideology. Because the promise of this ideology was:
“The world will become a single market, countries will produce prosperity from competition, borders will lose their importance.”
In a world where the United States and the collective west are hegemons, this economic ideology has been added to the American geopolitics of the belt and the sea. After the 1980s, neoliberalism achieved global dominance through globalization under the protection of the US dollar, American military power, alliance system, and military bases. The end of the Cold War with the victory of the United States and the collapse of the communist bloc led the representatives of the US neocons and finance capital to the establishment of the New American Century, including the security geopolitics of Israel.
The expansion of neoliberalism was aimed with imperialist initiatives such as post-modern colonies, access to unlimited resources, the formation of new markets, and the Greater Middle East and North Africa Project. As Yugoslavia disintegrated, the United States encouraged the prolongation of the civil war to intervene in Europe and prove that American military power was indispensable for Europe.
Thus, with the end of the Cold War, the disintegration of Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia and then Yugoslavia was achieved in the first decade. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the EU’s independent military identity has been weakened, while NATO’s expansion has been ensured in line with the process of containment and disintegration of Russia. NATO was promoted from 16 to 32 members. NATO was used in Afghanistan even though it had no area of authority and responsibility. The post-September 11, 2001, Global War on Terror paradigm and the civil wars and occupations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen not only brought death and destruction, but also initiated unprecedented mass refugee flows to many countries, especially in Europe.
In short, the geopolitics of neoliberalism combined with American and Israeli geopolitics brought chaos, instability and death to the whole world. In this process, wars such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria were not won but were continued uncessantly. The interventions were created not for victory, but to feed the defense industry and lobbies. The endless wars of the United States today are still determined not by national interests, but by the interests of finance capital and the military-industrial complex.
The Geopolitics of Post-Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism was the global order of exploitation shaped by the finance capital world, intertwined with the US and the EU, in the triangle of the IMF, the World Bank and NATO. This order is collapsing, and the hegemony’s response to this collapse is taking place with a great reckoning in the geopolitical arena. This process is taking place with provoked proxy wars and hybrid wars. While economic wars are waged with embargoes, sudden tax/tariff increases, seizures of competitors’ assets in banks, sanctions, exclusion operations from financial systems such as SWIFT, cyber-attacks, data theft, blocking access to rare metals and the technological war continues with the technology embargo.
On the other hand, psychological warfare through media manipulation, spreading fake news, and creating perceptions with reverse flag operations continues to be an important front of the hybrid war. While proxy wars and crises continue in Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, Yemen, Libya, Iran and Israel, the risk of conflict in Moldova, Kaliningrad, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Serbia and Kosovo is rising. The strategy of the Trump era, which stood against neoliberalism and globalization but could not resist Israel and the Zionist structure, was to bring Russia closer to the West and cut it off from China. This strategy was opposed by Britain, an island state.
In the struggle between Trump’s MAGA group and the globalists, British influence prevailed, using the Zionist lobby, and Trump backed down. Therefore, Trump’s strategy of rapprochement with Russia has failed, on the contrary, the Sino-Russian alliance has strengthened. From the beginning, China saw Russia’s defeat as a threat to its own existence. Because if Russia is defeated and disintegrated, Eurasia will be torn apart.
On the other hand, after 2001, the U.S. turned into a proxy for finance capital and Zionism rather than a protector of its own interests. The aggressive foreign policy of the United States has led to the emergence of a global counter-alliance led by Iran, China and Russia. The U.S., Israel, and the collective West initially thought that states such as Iran, China, and Russia would give up easily. Washington’s geopolitical mistakes have led to a permanent change in the global order. The situation made by Russia, US and EU strategists before 2022 proved the opposite. It has now become clear that Russia, which sees NATO’s expansion to the east as an existential threat, will oppose the scenarios that the collective West will provoke not only with Ukraine but also with other scenarios unless its own geopolitical guarantees are met in the new period.
Russia, whose hand has become stronger in Ukraine, will not stop until Ukraine surrenders unconditionally. China, on the other hand, will not allow Taiwan to turn into an American base 60 miles away, like NATO’s expansion. Taiwan is to China what Cuba is to the United States. The decline of the USA in every field, especially its drift into a position of succumbing to Israel’s blackmail, has eliminated its characteristics of being the center of attraction and determining the rules.
To this day, all empires have collapsed when they expanded beyond their capabilities and retreated for wars they could not sustain. Today, the United States faces three major and important competitors at the same time. It is in an active struggle against Russia in Ukraine, Iran in the Middle East, and China in the Pacific. These three fronts are pushing the United States, which is already polarized at home and has come to a civil war environment, beyond its capacity. Another reason for this situation has to do with military power. In particular, the decline in military logistics integration based on production power, the inadequacy of shipbuilding capacity is challenging the USA. The stocks for long-range attack and critical air defense missiles stocks are diminishing to the levels of not in months, to the weeks and days. The two most important examples of this vulnerability can be given with Trump’s withdrawal in the face of the Yemeni Houthis and the offer of a ceasefire to Iran with the mediation of the United States after Israel’s failure to stop Iranian attacks during the 12-day Iran-Israel war.
On the other hand, NATO is not only weakened in terms of conventional power but also faces serious constraints and challenges in its decision-making process. It is almost impossible for 32 members to reach full unanimous agreement on any issue. China and Russia have much more sustainable combat readiness, decision-making and combat capabilities. This situation increases the transformation of protracted wars such as the Ukraine crisis into a war of attrition and the risk of the use of nuclear weapons.
On the other hand, today’s ongoing wars and economic arm wrestling are radically changing the geopolitical distribution of power. Rather than classical polarization, the new system has become a multi-faceted but fragile, semi-complex (chaotic) structure in which centers compete. In addition to traditional global power centers such as the USA, the EU, China and Russia, regional powers such as India, Iran, Türkiye, Brazil and Saudi Arabia are now also involved in the game as actors. It can be said that we are at a historical turning point for the world in this emerging picture.
Today, U.S. foreign policy is shaped by “neocon” ideology and powerful interest lobbies (especially the Israel lobby). The geopolitical picture that will emerge in the new multipolar world model will depend on the decision of the aggressive neocon and Zionist camp of the USA. By turning to internal reforms, Washington can abandon the era of constant wars and provocations and choose the path of compromise and choose a path that respects the balance of power and does not encourage war, like the cold war era. Or it can persist on the current path and risk a major war between the great powers, which would increase the risk of the use of nuclear weapons. Israel occupies a special place in this equation. With its narrow geography, its small population but its ability to operate with secret services, military and special forces far beyond its power, and most importantly, its unruly destruction power even if it commits crimes amounting to genocide, it maintains the feature of being the mafia state of the USA and the EU, or rather the financial capital world.
However, the country is in a state of serious polarization and economic crisis. Netanyahu’s strategy of perpetual war to stay in power is in fact darkening Israel’s future. While a state of perpetual war is profitable for both the defense industry and finance capital, it has devastating implications for the long-term security and prosperity of the United States too. In this context, Netanyahu’s geopolitical faits accompli to the United States cause the new world order to be established in an uncontrolled mess instead of a controllable one. In this context, the difficulties faced by Israel and the United States, especially in the last four days of the 12-day war with Iran, did not go unnoticed by the whole world. Israel’s planned strategy of “one-shot destruction” has failed. The U.S.-Israeli attacks have increased Iran’s resilience. This situation strengthened the front of resistance against the US-led hegemony.
In short, the new period can be called a period of multipolar chaos in which no bloc can fully dominate and revolves around the “fragile alliances” established by regional powers with short-term interests. In this environment, markets struggle to find confidence; Investments are limited by regional stability. Economic growth slows down, financial crises become more frequent and unpredictable. In this respect, in the new period we have entered, blocs based on temporary cooperation, fragile alliances, friendships and in short, chaos are now the new normal. In this environment, transport and energy corridors, financial systems and digital infrastructures have become strategic fronts. Under these conditions, we can talk about four different geopolitical fronts. While the Western Bloc consists of the USA, the EU, the UK, Israel and Japan; China, Russia, Iran, Belarus and North Korea are blocs in Eurasia. While India, Brazil and South Africa are emerging in the Global South, Türkiye (although act in accordance with the US, Britain and Israel), Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and Mexico are also emerging as independent regional powers.
In addition to these developments, the geopolitical advantage of the United States decreases as the blocs become stronger, and the Washington Consensus loses its meaning. BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the EU’s quest for strategic autonomy, and the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) countries’ own visions are now taking their place against the USA. In this period of turmoil, we can say that China and Russia have long-term, patient and deep strategies. To break this resistance, the Collective West continues its psychological warfare and various conspiracies and provocations, but it is failing day by day.
.
Members, Partners and Outreach invitees on the sidelines of 17th BRICS Summit at Rio de Janeiro, in Brazil on July 07, 2025. (GODL India)
.
The fact that the U.S. is losing power and standing by Israel, which has committed war crimes amounting to genocide, encourages these organizations and states to act in their own interests. On the other hand, Trump’s ego-driven tariff war is destroying the credibility of the United States. The collapse of the global free market is creating new power vacuums, especially in Africa, Central Asia and South America. These gaps trigger proxy wars and regional rivalries. In this environment of real uncertainty and confusion, the era of military alliances and bilateral military cooperation agreements on which traditional military blocs, especially US hegemony, are based, is entering a new phase.
Many countries, especially NATO members, which have felt themselves under the assurance of the USA until today, are redefining their national security and defense industries and focusing on national production. The fact that England and France on July 10 and Germany and Britain on July 17, 2025 signed the nuclear cooperation and defense agreements are clear proofs that NATO provides a security guarantee on paper.
In short, even in the collective west, the policy of self-sufficiency in security comes to the fore. Today, the new state-controlled nationalism and protectionism in technology, defense and digital infrastructure are becoming the new normal. The wars of the new era are not only military, but also have technological, intelligence and psychological dimensions. Strategic autonomy, national defense and geopolitical awareness come to the fore in state administration. As in the cases of Syria and Iran, the collapse of countries’ air defense systems becomes a necessary condition for regime change, occupation and psychological warfare. Electronic warfare and intelligence-backed sabotage, unorthodox tactics that create an asymmetrical effect replace the classic military intervention. Especially after what happened in the Ukraine, Russia and Israel-Iran conflict, Russia-China-Iran cooperation against the collective West and Israel has become an existential necessity on the axis of air defense and cyber security.
Result
The United States is no longer a superpower. The U.S. doesn’t produce, it lives on debt, but the post-1991 power psychology persists, while it is weak and polarized. In this context, social resistance and resilience are very low. Young people, in particular, are questioning the US administration’s unconditional support for Israel. The prohibition of defending Palestine through fascistic measures pushes the young population to oppose Israel. 50% of the population opposes military aid to Israel.
In short, its military, economic and strategic capacity has been weakened. They are still weak in the face of the continental powers with the old doctrines focused on sea-air power. Even in the field of maritime power, where it is the strongest, US is in a serious decline against China. While the new world order is evolving into a multipolar form, the old hegemon is trying to start wars and redesign borders in the last stage to gain an advantageous position in the new order. Even if it cannot afford this, it is at least striving to wear down and encircle Russia and China with the chaos and provocations it creates, and at the same time to achieve Israel’s geopolitical goals. In this context, the world is rapidly moving towards a major catastrophe, including the risk of nuclear war.
The Ukraine War is no longer just a regional conflict. It has turned into an existential struggle between the West (US-NATO) and the China-Russia axis. The problem is that there are no wise and virtuous leaders who can avert this catastrophe. Today, the most fundamental problem of the NATO states and the countries in the US club is that although they were elected, these leaders came to power with the facilitation of the establishment under the guidance of the Zionist lobby, strong intelligence and secret services, especially in the USA. Today, many of them are personalities raised by the global financial capital system. Decision-making in Washington is dominated by populism, ignorance and vested interests. Leaders like Trump make decisions based on marketing and image management, not strategic knowledge. These weaknesses are dragging the U.S. into both economic collapse at home and uncontrolled conflicts abroad. None of those in charge in the US and the EU have strategic depth.
Leaders only know how to win elections. Foreign policy, on the other hand, is guided by lobbies and consultants. Today, in Europe, which prides itself on being the cradle of democracy, the leaders that the people want and tend to are neutralized either by conspiracies or by legal coups (e.g., France, Germany, Romania). Elected leaders turn their countries into a tool or even extras used at the disposal of finance capital, especially the USA, and make decisions against the will of the people. The peoples of the EU countries are being dragged into the continuation of the Ukraine-Russia war for the EU administration under the command of US geopolitics and finance capital, because of which they face expensive energy, deindustrialization and refugee flows, in the final analysis, they become impoverished and ready for a social explosion. Those who come to power with the will of the people are also faced with the punishment of finance capital in a short time and their countries are forced to go bankrupt. (Example, Syriza Party and Greece)
Another problem is that the secret services act against the will of the government. In particular, the operations carried out by the CIA, MI6 and Mossad in the field are often out of control, indicating that democratic control mechanisms are weakening. This carries the risk of unpredictable crises because of reverse flag operations, and small events turning into big wars. Most importantly, there is a risk that the United States will resort to war to get out of the economic crisis, as it has done in history. The same option was applied by Britain in 1914 at the beginning of the First World War. The most fundamental factor that prevents this risk, that is, a global world war, is that we are in the era of nuclear power. In short, as the American century comes to an end, the world is moving towards either a controlled division of spheres of influence or a period of chaos that will continue with instability and endless wars. In both scenarios, there are serious pitfalls as well as historical opportunities for many countries. It is very important to be on the right side here. Being indecisive is the most dangerous. Either the US hegemony, which desires the continuation of the old exploitation order in the new period, or the decision to take part in the resistance front that resists it is getting closer day by day.
Lessons in Türkiye
The multi-front crisis spiral that the U.S. has fallen into means both a threat and an opportunity for Türkiye at the same time. In this new conjuncture, rapidly moving away from the unipolar security approach. It is now inevitable to develop multifaceted diplomacy, alternative alliances and independent defense capacity. In this new era, while the traditional superpowers are weakening, old alliances are disintegrating, and new blocs are emerging. In such a situation, a realistic, flexible and national interest-oriented strategy for Türkiye is no longer a choice, but a necessity.
Although Türkiye’s NATO membership continues to offer an advantage on paper, excessive dependence on this alliance leads to strategic blindness, and the development of alternative security mechanisms becomes an irrevocable necessity. Today we are in a transitional period in which neoliberalism is beginning to unravel, the major ideological and economic theses have collapsed, but the rules of the new order have not yet been written. In this interim period, countries such as Türkiye will either remain a passive figure in the order established by others, or they will rise to the role of playmaker by building their own strategic architecture.
The path to this choice is clear: institutionalized state mind, science-technology and human resources investments based on merit and virtue, social consensus and building resilient structures in the secular, democratic nation-state model. While the global legitimacy of neoliberal ideology has collapsed, the struggles for power and wealth have not ended. And it won’t. The scene has changed, the actors have diversified, and the rules are still waiting to be written. Who will be the rule-maker in this uncertain game will shape the future. As the unipolar world comes to an end, the necessity for Türkiye to recover its domestic front, to form an independent strategic mind, to develop multifaceted cooperation and its own defense capability is more pressing than ever.
However, Türkiye’s current orientation cannot respond to this need with both the government and the opposition. The current foreign policy line, guided by the US, the UK, the EU and NATO, contradicts our historical principles of independence. In the case of Syria, the approach of being a tool for proxy wars should be abandoned and regional strategies should be created that focus directly on Türkiye’s security. Today, Türkiye is experiencing a new version of the Tanzimatist orientation that began in 1946 with the abandonment of Ataturk’s independent, non-aligned foreign policy line. At that time, the identity of the United States as a war winner and its economic power were the center of attraction. Not today. However, Türkiye is still pursuing this collapsing order and trying to implement the prescriptions written in western capitals.
Moreover, this process has dangerous consequences in domestic politics. The vision of Neo-Ottomanism guided by the American Ambassador, weakens the unifying power of Turkish identity with the separation of ummah and nation, and threatens the secular, nation-state structure with new constitution discussions. The PKK’s political legitimacy by ignoring its terror past causes great wounds in the conscience of the people. While the 5% contribution of water and agriculturally rich Southeastern Anatolia to the Turkish economy shows the strategic importance of this region in the future, it is a vital necessity that every constitutional amendment to be made is shaped by the support of the people. Otherwise, this process may turn into a “honey trap” and destabilize Türkiye.
Similar weaknesses are observed in foreign policy. Due to the scandalous wrong policies pursued in Syria, we have now become de facto border neighbor with Israel. Drilling and seismic surveys have been suspended in the Blue Homeland since November 2020. Such geopolitical adventures could put our homeland, such as Southeastern Anatolia, at risk. The Republic of Türkiye was founded after a great war of independence. Thousands of martyrs were lost for the sake of these lands and borders. Now, we are expected to be extras in the scenario of a “puppet Kurdish state with access to the sea” drawn by the US and Israel. This is unacceptable.
Türkiye, as a medium-sized power, should strengthen its strategic position based on flexible diplomacy, regional leadership and institutional effectiveness. The biggest threat today is being open to foreign interventions due to internal political polarization, lack of strategic vision, and institutional weakness. Instead of blindly trusting the U.S., it is essential for Türkiye to develop independent reflexes.
In military policy, it should focus on its own security priorities rather than being a tool of the United States’ interest-oriented wars. Diplomatically, the opportunities offered by alternative structures such as BRICS should be evaluated. Israel should be reacted to not only with words, but also with deeds (such as the closure of the Kürecik base and the cessation of the flow of oil in the BTC Line). Economically, resilient structures should be built that will not be affected by US-centered crises. The strategic mind, on the other hand, should not be rote but realistic, cool-headed and agile. Türkiye’s tactical and strategic air defense should be completed in a short time with national resources. Based on military cooperation with Russia and China, long-range hypersonic ballistic missile technology should be developed as soon as possible. The Kaan Fighter Jet project should be prioritized and our air power should be renewed. Emphasis should be placed on strengthening our submarine fleet, which is Türkiye’s greatest deterrent force, with the MILDEN project, the resources allocated to surface power should be transferred to the strengthening of our submarine fleet, and Türkiye’s full control of the underwater in the Eastern Mediterranean should be guaranteed as a basis. In this context, all kinds of measures should be taken to start mass production of AKYA, the heavy torpedo for our submarines. It should be considered that our electronic warfare and cyber defense infrastructure is established, and that the software, communication and GPS infrastructure, which we are dependent on the West and Israel, are backed up with Chinese and Russian systems while nationalizing.
Türkiye is entering a very difficult period with a fragmented domestic front. The geopolitical blindness of the opposition and the government in the Blue Homeland, the TRNC and our Southeast make new geopolitical suicides inevitable. Military hospitals are closed, military high schools are closed, military academies are not affiliated with the Forces. The material and moral dimensions of the damage to our armed forces caused by FETÖ, or rather by the CIA, MI6, BND and Mossad, with the internal collaborators are indescribable. In such a conjuncture, Türkiye is trying to move away from the nation-state, unitary structure and secularism step by step under the guidance of the USA and Britain. While most of the people are overwhelmingly loyal to Atatürk, the republic and its basic principles, it is not possible to understand the minority’s desire for geopolitical and regime changes in good faith.
Despite declining American hegemony and collapsing neoliberalism, acting in accordance with the religious and ethnic dividing policies they love so much, is tantamount to heading the iceberg on the Titanic bridge when you know she will sink. Neither the power of the Turkish nation nor its glorious history will agree to this course. There is no other course of salvation than the Kemalist prescription written by Atatürk 100 years ago. I hope that it will be possible for our state and nation to see this fact before it hits the bottom.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.
Ret Admiral Cem Gürdeniz, Writer, Geopolitical Expert, Theorist and creator of the Turkish Bluehomeland (Mavi Vatan) doctrine. He served as the Chief of Strategy Department and then the head of Plans and Policy Division in Turkish Naval Forces Headquarters. As his combat duties, he has served as the commander of Amphibious Ships Group and Mine Fleet between 2007 and 2009. He retired in 2012. He established Hamit Naci Blue Homeland Foundation in 2021. He has published numerous books on geopolitics, maritime strategy, maritime history and maritime culture. He is also a honorary member of ATASAM. Visit his blog here.
Featured image is from the author
Global Research is a reader-funded media. We do not accept any funding from corporations or governments. Help us stay afloat. Click the image below to make a one-time or recurring donation.
Counter Information publish all articles following the Creative Commons rule creative commons. If you don't want your article to appear in this blog email me and I will remove it asap.
No comments:
Post a Comment