Why Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s grip on power survives—and what it costs ordinary Turks.
In the summer heat of Istanbul, crowds still find their way to the squares. Some hold faded party flags; others just stand there, silent. They’ve learned that shouting can land you in jail. Yet they come. Because somewhere under the slogans and fear, a memory of democracy still flickers.
The Strongman’s Bargain
Just days after protesters filled Turkey’s streets to oppose another crackdown, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was photographed smiling beside Donald Trump at the White House. Behind that photo was a price: orders for Boeing planes, F-16s, and a 20-year deal to buy U.S. liquefied natural gas.
That image—one leader grinning, the other calculating—captured Erdoğan’s method perfectly. He trades what the West needs most—location, soldiers, stability—for what he needs most: silence.
Europe Looked the Other Way
Back in 2016, the European Union handed Ankara €6 billion to keep millions of Syrian refugees from crossing into Europe. In return, Europe delayed a human-rights report that would have embarrassed Erdoğan. That was the lesson: if Turkey delivered on Europe’s interests, Europe would politely avert its eyes.
Since then, Turkey’s value has only grown. When Russia invaded Ukraine, Erdoğan became the only NATO leader who could still call both Moscow and Kyiv. Turkish-built drones flew over Ukrainian skies. A Turkish-engineered munitions plant opened in Texas. Even the EU’s SAFE defense initiative now includes Ankara.
The Politics of Respectability
Western politicians line up for photo opportunities—Keir Starmer in Ankara, Friedrich Merz praising “deepened partnership.” Each handshake buys Erdoğan a little more legitimacy back home, even as opposition mayors and journalists fill the prisons.
In March, Istanbul’s mayor and Erdoğan’s chief rival, Ekrem İmamoğlu, was arrested again—this time accused of “political espionage.” Ten other opposition mayors followed. Protests continued, but Erdoğan didn’t blink. He didn’t have to. His allies abroad kept calling him “indispensable.”
A Democracy on Hold
Erdoğan once rose on promises to fight corruption, reduce poverty, and expand freedoms. For a few years he even delivered; Turkey began E.U. accession talks in 2005. But two decades later, the economy is brittle, the middle class is exhausted, and dissent costs careers—or worse.
Yet Europe and America keep doing business. They justify it as “strategic necessity.” In practice, it’s moral outsourcing: let Turks pay the democratic price while the West secures its borders and energy routes.
The Human Cost
For ordinary Turks, the bargain feels cruelly simple. Prices climb, freedoms shrink, and the same faces rule. Young engineers emigrate to Germany. Shopkeepers in Konya whisper that “politics is dangerous again.” Mothers hide their sons’ social-media posts.
The West may see Erdoğan as a stabilizing partner. Turks see a man who made the world’s approval his armor.
At its core, this is not only Erdoğan’s story—it’s Europe’s and America’s too.
When democracies excuse authoritarianism for convenience, they don’t just lose moral ground abroad. They train their own citizens to believe that principles are negotiable.
Somewhere in Istanbul, a protester still holds a flag in the dark. It’s not the noise of defiance that matters anymore. It’s the persistent.
India's emergence as Armenia's largest arms supplier since 2020 represents a dramatic geopolitical realignment that mirrors Turkey's longstanding support for Pakistan.South China Morning PostAtlantic Council This strategic partnership, worth over $1.5 billion in defense contracts, has fundamentally transformed regional power dynamics while raising questions about diplomatic consistency. Jamestown +2 The evidence reveals a sophisticated strategic calculation rather than simple hypocrisy, with India leveraging Armenia's security needs to counter the Turkey-Pakistan-Azerbaijan axis that emerged after the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war.
Military support reaches unprecedented levels
India's military assistance to Armenia has been both comprehensive and unprecedented in its scope. The centerpiece of this support is the $720 million Akash air defense system contract , making Armenia the first foreign operator of India's indigenous surface-to-air missile technology. Jamestown +3 This was followed by the $265 million Pinaka multiple-launch rocket system deal and $155 million in ATAGS artillery systems, representing India's first major exports of these advanced weapons platforms. DNA India +6
The transformation has been remarkable in its speed and scale. Armenia has shifted from 94% dependence on Russian arms during 2011-2020 to becoming India's largest defense customer by 2024. JamestownEurasia Review This includes delivery of SWATHI weapon-locating radars worth $40 million, Delhi Defense Review +2 MArG self-propelled howitzers valued at $155.5 million, and sophisticated anti-drone systems worth $41 million. OpIndia +3 The military cooperation extends beyond hardware to institutional relationships, with both countries appointing defense attachés and establishing joint training programs. The Geopolitics +4
Beyond conventional weapons, India has provided Armenia with critical technological capabilities including advanced radar systems, cyber warfare support, and intelligence-sharing mechanisms. Atlantic Council The partnership includes technology transfer agreements that allow Armenia to maintain and upgrade systems locally, ensuring long-term strategic dependence on Indian expertise.
Diplomatic backing evolves from neutrality to support
India's diplomatic position on the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict has undergone a notable evolution from cautious neutrality to more pronounced support. In September 2020, India's Ministry of External Affairs issued balanced statements calling for cessation of hostilities without taking sides. Ministry of External Affairs However, by September 2022, during renewed border clashes, India's diplomatic language had shifted significantly.
The Indian government began using terms like "aggressor side" when referring to attacks on Armenian territory, while stopping short of explicitly naming Azerbaijan. Business Standard +2 This diplomatic evolution coincided with Pakistan's military support for Azerbaijan during the 2020 war , including reports of Pakistani personnel strategic involvement and coordination. DNA India India's UN representative reiterated concerns about attacks on Armenian civilian infrastructure, marking a clear diplomatic alignment with Armenia's position. Wikipedia
Strategic cooperation has expanded beyond military affairs to include economic partnerships through the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), where Armenia serves as a crucial gateway for Indian exports to Europe and Central Asia. OC Media +2 This $2 billion connectivity project positions Armenia as strategically vital to India's Eurasian ambitions, while providing Armenia with economic alternatives to Russian dependence. ORF Online +3
Turkey-Pakistan partnership sets the precedent
Turkey's support for Pakistan represents one of the most comprehensive strategic partnerships in contemporary international relations, providing crucial context for evaluating India's Armenia relationship. Wikipedia Turkey has emerged as Pakistan's second-largest arms supplier , with defense contracts worth over $3 billion since 2018, including the MILGEM naval program ($1.5 billion) WikipediaIsrael Defense and T129 attack helicopters ($1.5 billion).
The partnership extends far beyond military cooperation to encompass unwavering diplomatic support on Kashmir, intelligence sharing between MIT and ISI, and comprehensive economic integration targeting $5 billion in bilateral trade. WikipediaThe Media Line Turkey has imposed a complete arms export ban on India specifically to support Pakistan, Nordic Monitor while providing consistent diplomatic backing during every Indo-Pakistani crisis since 1947.
Military cooperation includes joint exercises, technology transfer for fifth-generation fighter development, and extensive training programs with over 1,500 Pakistani officers trained in Turkey. Wikipedia +2 The relationship has institutional depth through the High-Level Strategic Cooperation Council and formal intelligence-sharing agreements that few bilateral partnerships achieve. WikipediaThe Media Line
Strategic calculations drive both partnerships
The geopolitical motivations behind both relationships reflect sophisticated strategic calculations rather than simple opportunism. India's support for Armenia serves multiple objectives: countering the Turkey-Pakistan-Azerbaijan axis, establishing defense export capabilities, securing alternative connectivity routes to Europe, and filling the vacuum left by Russia's declining influence in the South Caucasus. Atlantic Council
The Pakistan-Turkey-Azerbaijan triangle has formalized through trilateral agreements and "Three Brothers" military exercises , The Times Of Central AsiaAze creating a strategic arc from Central Asia through the South Caucasus to South Asia. JamestownAPRI Armenia This alignment explicitly supports Pakistan's position on Kashmir while providing Azerbaijan with crucial military capabilities during its conflicts with Armenia. India.comJamestown
India's response through the Armenia partnership represents what experts call "soft balancing" - using economic and defense cooperation to counter perceived threats rather than direct military confrontation. The partnership provides India with strategic depth in Eurasia while offering Armenia an alternative to Russian dependence and NATO membership uncertainties. Atlantic Council
Scale and nature reveal different dynamics
Comparing the scale and nature of support reveals distinction important between these partnerships. Turkey's support for Pakistan spans over seven decades with consistent backing across multiple governments and crises. Wikipedia The relationship encompasses historical, cultural, and religious dimensions that create deep societal connections beyond government-to-government cooperation. Wikipedia
India's Armenia partnership, while significant in financial terms, represents a more recent strategic alignment focused primarily on defense and connectivity interests. The relationship lacks the cultural and historical depth of Turkey-Pakistan ties , being driven primarily by strategic calculations rather than identity-based connections.
However, the military dimension of India's Armenia support has been remarkably comprehensive, with Armenia receiving cutting-edge indigenous Indian systems before they were fully deployed by Indian forces. This suggests a level of strategic commitment that extends beyond transactional relationships to genuine strategic partnership. Indian Defense Research Wing
Expert analysis challenges hypocrisy claims
Leading international relations experts and regional specialists provide nuanced perspectives on claims of double standards. Research from Observer Research Foundation, Carnegie Endowment, and other prominent think tanks reveals limited expert consensus supporting hypocrisy accusations against India.
Most experts frame both relationships as legitimate strategic responses to regional security challenges. Dr. Vali Kaleji of the Middle East Institute describes the dynamic as "soft balancing" versus "hard balancing" , arguing that Armenia-Iran-India cooperation focuses on economic-transit approaches rather than purely military responses.
Regional experts consistently emphasize that both partnerships serve legitimate security interests in an increasingly multipolar world. The expert community appears to prioritize strategic analysis over moral judgment, suggesting that claims of hypocrisy may be more political rhetoric than substantiated analytical consensus.
Regional implications point to new strategic architecture
These parallel partnerships reflect a fundamental reconfiguration of regional power dynamics that extends beyond traditional geographic boundaries. The emergence of cross-cutting alliance systems challenges existing security architectures and creates new forms of strategic competition.
The militarization of connectivity routes and proxy competition dynamics pose risks for regional stability. South Asian rivalries are increasingly exported to the South Caucasus, while Middle Eastern conflicts influence South Asian strategic calculations. This creates potential for escalation as regional disputes become linked through alliance politics.
The partnerships also reflect the acceleration of multipolarity, with middle powers pursuing independent foreign policies through various alliance structures. Traditional frameworks like CSTO, SCO, and NATO prove insufficient for managing these new competitive dynamics, requiring innovative approaches to multilateral cooperation and conflict prevention.
Conclusion
India's support for Armenia represents a sophisticated strategic response to regional security challenges rather than simple hypocrisy regarding Turkey's Pakistan backing. While both partnerships serve legitimate strategic interests, they reflect different historical contexts, scales of commitment, and underlying motivations. The emergence of these cross-cutting alignments signals a new era of regional competition that challenges traditional alliance structures and requires careful management to prevent escalation and maintain stability.
The ultimate test of these partnerships will be their ability to deliver concrete security and economic benefits while managing the risks of proxy competition and regional escalation. Success will require innovative approaches to multilateral cooperation that account for the new realities of middle power competition in an increasingly multipolar world.
Turkey has updated its e-visa rules for Schengen visa holders. If you hold a valid Schengen visa, you're eligible for a Turkish e-visa, which is super easy to apply for and usually approved immediately ¹. The e-visa is valid for 180 days, and you can enter Turkey multiple times within that period. However, your stay is limited to 30 or 90 days, depending on your nationality.
Eligibility Criteria:
- Hold a valid Schengen visa
- Have a passport valid for at least six months from your intended arrival date in Turkey
- Provide required documents, including your passport, Schengen visa, and proof of sufficient funds
Application Process:
- Fill out the online application form on the official Turkish e-visa website
- Pay the visa fee
- Receive your e-visa via email
Important Notes:
- Make sure to apply for your e-visa at least 48 hours before your flight to Turkey
- Carry a printed or digital copy of your e-visa when traveling to Turkey
- Ensure your Schengen visa is valid at the time of entering Turkey ¹
Would you like to know more about traveling to Turkey or the requirements for specific nationalities?
The Arab Revolt was an armed uprising by the Hashemite Arabs of the Hejaz against the Ottoman Empire during World War I. Here are the key details:
Cause and Goals:
The revolt began officially on June 10, 1916, initiated at Mecca based on the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. This correspondence exchanged between Henry McMahon (representing the United Kingdom) and Hussein bin Ali (of the Kingdom of Hejaz) promised Arab independence in exchange for their rebellion against the ruling Turks.
The primary goal of the Arab rebels was to establish an independent and unified Arab state stretching from Aleppo to Aden, which the British government had promised to recognize.
Conflict and Outcomes:
The Sharifian Army, led by Hussein and the Hashemites, with backing from the British military's Egyptian Expeditionary Force, fought and expelled the Ottoman military presence from much of the Hejaz and Transjordan.
By 1918, the rebels had captured Damascus and proclaimed the Arab Kingdom of Syria, led by Hussein's son Faisal I.
However, the British, who had covertly signed the Sykes–Picot Agreement with the French, reneged on their promise to support the Arabs' establishment of a singular Arab state. Instead, the Arab-majority Ottoman territories were broken up into a number ofLeague of Nations mandates, jointly controlled by the British and the French.
Casualties:
The exact number of casualties during the Arab Revolt is not known precisely, but it is estimated that more than 5,000 Arabs were killed, 15,000 wounded, and 5,600 imprisoned.
The Ottoman side suffered 47,000+ total casualties, including 5,000 killed and 10,000 wounded.
Disease-related deaths also contributed to the toll.
British Involvement:
The British provided significant support to the Arab forces:
A naval flotilla, including the seaplane carrier HMS Ben-My-Chree, bombarded Turkish fortifications and disrupted their efforts.
The British dispatched their own military mission, including Lieutenant T.E. Lawrence (known as Lawrence of Arabia), to liaise between the Arab leadership and the British high command in Egypt.
The assistance included the landing of the first units of the Arab Regular Army, Ottoman soldiers captured by the British who volunteered to fight for the Arab nationalist cause.
The British naval and military support played a crucial role in the success of the Arab Revolt.
In summary, the Arab Revolt marked a significant chapter in the struggle for Arab independence during World War I, but its ultimate outcomes were shaped by geopolitical interests and agreements beyond the Arab fighters' control1456..
