What Countries Does Turkey Not Get Along With? Navigating Complex Geopolitical Relationships

What countries does Turkey not get along with? Navigating Complex Geopolitical Relationships

It’s a question I’ve heard more than once, especially when following the news from that part of the world. A friend, an avid traveler, once asked me, genuinely perplexed, “You know, I’m planning a trip that goes through several countries in the Eastern Mediterranean and Black Sea region, and I keep seeing headlines about Turkey being in some kind of dispute. It makes me wonder, what countries does Turkey not get along with, and how does that actually affect things on the ground?” It’s a fair question, and one that touches upon the intricate tapestry of modern international relations. Turkey, strategically positioned at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, finds itself in a geopolitical landscape that is, to put it mildly, dynamic. Its relationships with various nations are often characterized by a mix of cooperation, competition, and, at times, outright friction. Understanding these complex dynamics is crucial for grasping Turkey’s foreign policy and its role in regional and global affairs.

So, to directly answer the question: Turkey doesn’t have uniformly amicable relationships with all its neighbors and global players. Several countries have ongoing or historical tensions with Turkey, stemming from a variety of issues including territorial disputes, historical grievances, ideological differences, and strategic rivalries. These relationships are not static; they can evolve based on changing political climates, leadership, and regional events. For instance, while Turkey might enjoy strong ties with one nation today, tomorrow’s news cycle could reveal a new point of contention.

My own observations, from following Turkey’s foreign policy over the years, suggest that it’s rarely black and white. There are often shades of gray, where a country might be an ally on one front and a rival on another. It’s a delicate balancing act that the Turkish government, led by President Erdoğan, seems to navigate with a certain degree of assertiveness. This assertiveness, while sometimes leading to criticism, is also seen by some as a necessary response to protecting national interests in a volatile region. Let’s delve deeper into the specific countries and the nature of these complex relationships.

Greece: A Long-Standing Rivalry Rooted in History

Perhaps one of the most enduring and well-documented relationships where Turkey does not get along well is with its neighbor, Greece. This isn’t a recent development; the animosity between the two nations is deeply embedded in centuries of history, including the Ottoman Empire’s rule over Greece and the subsequent Greek War of Independence, followed by population exchanges and territorial disputes after World War I.

The primary flashpoint today revolves around maritime boundaries and territorial rights in the Aegean Sea. Greece, an EU and NATO member, claims extensive territorial waters, Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs), and control over numerous islands, many of which lie very close to the Turkish mainland. Turkey, on the other hand, contests these claims, particularly regarding the extent of Greek territorial waters and the continental shelf rights derived from the islands.

Key Issues in the Greco-Turkish Relationship:

• Aegean Disputes: This is the most prominent area of contention. Greece asserts that its islands have a continental shelf and EEZ, similar to mainland territories. Turkey argues that the geographical proximity of these islands to its coast means that any EEZ or continental shelf should be demarcated based on equitable principles, not solely on island proximity. This dispute extends to airspace, flight information regions, and the militarization of certain Greek islands in the Aegean, which Turkey views as a violation of treaties.
• Eastern Mediterranean Hydrocarbons: The discovery of significant natural gas reserves in the Eastern Mediterranean has significantly amplified tensions. Greece, along with Cyprus and Egypt, has delineated its EEZ based on its islands. Turkey disputes these boundaries, arguing that it, along with the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), has rights to these resources. Turkey has conducted its own seismic surveys and exploration activities in waters claimed by Greece and Cyprus, leading to naval standoffs and strong diplomatic protests.
• Cyprus Issue: The division of Cyprus, a historically complex issue, remains a significant irritant. Turkey supports the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), which is recognized only by Turkey, while Greece aligns with the internationally recognized Republic of Cyprus. The unresolved status of the island, including the potential for hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation, continues to be a source of deep disagreement.
• Minority Rights and Historical Narratives: Historical grievances, including differing interpretations of past events and the treatment of minority populations (like the Turkish minority in Western Thrace and the Greek minority in Istanbul), also contribute to the strained relationship.

From my perspective, while both countries are NATO allies and share certain strategic interests, these deeply rooted disputes often overshadow cooperation. The rhetoric from both sides can escalate quickly, leading to heightened military readiness and diplomatic friction. It’s a classic case of how history and geography can create persistent geopolitical challenges.

To illustrate the complexity, consider this: In 2020, tensions flared dramatically when Turkey sent its exploration vessel Oruç Reis, accompanied by naval escorts, into waters that Greece considers part of its continental shelf. Greece responded by deploying its navy, and several European Union countries expressed solidarity with Greece, leading to a significant diplomatic crisis. It shows how a single maritime dispute can draw in regional and international actors.

Armenia: A Dark Chapter and Unresolved Grievances

The relationship between Turkey and Armenia is one characterized by profound historical trauma and a lack of diplomatic relations. Turkey does not have formal diplomatic ties with Armenia, and the border between the two countries has been closed for decades. The core of this deeply strained relationship lies in the events of 1915, during World War I, when the Ottoman government systematically deported and killed an estimated 1.5 million Armenians.

The Armenian Genocide Debate:

• Turkish Position: Turkey acknowledges that many Armenians died during this period, but it vehemently rejects the term “genocide.” It argues that the deaths were a tragic consequence of wartime conditions, intercommunal violence, and the displacement of populations, with both Armenians and Muslims suffering casualties. Turkey asserts that the deportations were a necessary measure to prevent Armenians from siding with Russia, its enemy at the time.
• Armenian and International Position: Armenia and a significant number of historians and countries around the world recognize the events of 1915 as the Armenian Genocide. They point to systematic policies of extermination, forced marches, massacres, and destruction of cultural heritage as clear evidence of intent to destroy the Armenian people.

This denial by Turkey is a fundamental obstacle to normalization. For Armenia, acknowledging the genocide is a matter of historical justice and national identity. For Turkey, acknowledging it is seen as potentially opening the door to reparations and territorial claims, a prospect it finds unacceptable. This disagreement is not just a historical footnote; it deeply influences current relations and prevents any meaningful progress towards rapprochement.

Beyond the genocide, there are other points of friction, including Turkey’s strong support for Azerbaijan, particularly in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Turkey has provided significant military and political backing to Azerbaijan, which has often put it at odds with Armenia’s interests. The open border issue, stemming from the 1993 blockade imposed by Turkey in solidarity with Azerbaijan during the first Karabakh war, remains a potent symbol of the broken ties.

It’s a somber relationship, marked by a deep, unaddressed wound. The lack of dialogue and the persistent denial of the genocide make it one of the most challenging bilateral relationships for Turkey, impacting its broader foreign policy in the Caucasus region.

Cyprus: The Divided Island and Regional Power Plays

The island of Cyprus, strategically located in the Eastern Mediterranean, is another major point of contention for Turkey, particularly with the Republic of Cyprus and, by extension, Greece and the European Union. The island has been divided since 1974, following a Greek Cypriot coup d’état aimed at uniting the island with Greece, and a subsequent Turkish invasion to protect the Turkish Cypriot minority.

The Cyprus Dispute:

• Two-State Solution vs. Federation: Turkey and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) advocate for a two-state solution, recognizing two sovereign entities on the island. The Republic of Cyprus, supported by the international community (except Turkey), insists on a federal solution, a reunified island under a single sovereign government, albeit with significant autonomy for the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities.
• Resource Rights: As mentioned in the Greece section, the potential for offshore hydrocarbon reserves has intensified the dispute. Turkey argues that any exploration and exploitation of these resources must involve or take into account the rights of the Turkish Cypriots. The Republic of Cyprus, however, claims exclusive rights to its EEZ, leading to Turkish maritime patrols and drilling operations in disputed waters.
• Security Guarantees: The role of Turkey as a guarantor power for the TRNC is another sticking point. Greece and the Republic of Cyprus seek the abolition of these guarantees, viewing them as a means of Turkish interference. Turkey, conversely, sees them as essential for the security of the Turkish Cypriot population.

My take on the Cyprus issue is that it’s a persistent geopolitical knot that has defied decades of negotiation. Turkey’s unwavering support for the TRNC and its assertive stance on maritime issues in the Eastern Mediterranean mean that Cyprus remains a significant source of friction, not just with the Republic of Cyprus and Greece, but also with the EU, of which Cyprus is a member state.

This situation often leads to Turkey clashing with EU foreign policy positions. When the EU imposes sanctions or criticizes Turkey’s actions regarding Cyprus or its drilling activities, it further strains the broader EU-Turkey relationship.

The United States: An Alliance Under Strain

The relationship between Turkey and the United States is perhaps one of the most complex, characterized by a long history of alliance within NATO, yet punctuated by significant disagreements and growing mistrust. While they are allies, the US and Turkey often find themselves on opposing sides of critical issues, leading to considerable friction.

Key Areas of Disagreement:

• Syrian Policy and the YPG: This is arguably the most significant recent point of contention. The US partnered with the Kurdish-led People’s Protection Units (YPG) in Syria to fight against ISIS. Turkey, however, views the YPG as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a designated terrorist organization by Turkey, the US, and the EU. Turkey fears the YPG’s growing influence on its border and has launched multiple military operations into northern Syria to push back YPG forces. This has led to direct confrontations and diplomatic crises, with the US caught between its anti-ISIS allies and its NATO partner.
• S-400 Missile System Purchase: Turkey’s decision to purchase the Russian S-400 missile defense system in 2017 was a major blow to US-Turkey relations. The US argued that the S-400 is incompatible with NATO systems and that Turkey’s acquisition would pose a security risk, particularly to its F-35 fighter jet program, in which Turkey was a partner and potential buyer. As a result, the US removed Turkey from the F-35 program and imposed sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).
• Human Rights and Democratic Concerns: The US has frequently expressed concerns over democratic backsliding, freedom of the press, and human rights issues in Turkey, particularly after the 2016 coup attempt and the subsequent crackdown. These concerns, often voiced by US officials and in Congressional reports, create diplomatic friction.
• Judicial and Diplomatic Incidents: Several specific incidents have aggravated relations, such as the arrest of US consulate employees in Turkey and the indictment of US citizens, including evangelical pastor Andrew Brunson, who was later released. These events have led to diplomatic crises and reciprocal visa bans.
• Eastern Mediterranean Policy: While primarily a dispute with Greece and Cyprus, the US’s increasing alignment with Greece and Cyprus on energy and security issues in the Eastern Mediterranean has also been a point of concern for Turkey.

It’s quite striking how an alliance built on shared Cold War objectives can face such deep rifts. The US sees Turkey’s actions, such as the S-400 purchase and its Syrian policy, as undermining NATO cohesion and US interests. Turkey, on the other hand, feels that the US has not adequately addressed its security concerns, particularly regarding the PKK and its Syrian affiliates, and has been insufficiently supportive during periods of political crisis.

The dynamic here is one of strategic divergence. While both nations are theoretically allies, their national interests and threat perceptions often diverge significantly, leading to a relationship that is more transactional and frequently contentious than one of deep, unwavering partnership. From my observation, this strain in the US-Turkey relationship has had ripple effects throughout NATO and regional security architectures.

Egypt: A Shift from Cooperation to Competition

Turkey’s relationship with Egypt has undergone a dramatic transformation, moving from a period of relative warmth and cooperation to one of significant tension and political rivalry, particularly after the 2013 ousting of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi by the military.

The Post-2013 Divide:

• Political Ideology: Turkey, under President Erdoğan, has been a strong supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Morsi was a member. Egypt’s new government, led by President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, views the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization and an existential threat. This ideological clash is a fundamental driver of the animosity. Turkey openly criticized Morsi’s overthrow, leading to a severe diplomatic rupture.
• Eastern Mediterranean Disputes: The burgeoning hydrocarbon exploration in the Eastern Mediterranean has become a new arena for competition. Egypt, along with Greece, Cyprus, and Israel, has delineated its EEZ, which Turkey disputes. Turkey’s assertive stance in the region, including its maritime deal with Libya, has put it at odds with Egypt’s regional alliances and energy ambitions.
• Libya Intervention: Turkey’s military intervention in Libya, supporting the UN-recognized Government of National Accord (GNA) against Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA), has been a major source of tension with Egypt. Egypt views Haftar as a bulwark against Islamist influence and sees Turkish support for the GNA as destabilizing to the region and a direct threat to its own security interests.
• Media and Rhetoric: For years, Egyptian state media and Turkish government-backed media outlets engaged in a war of words, each criticizing the other’s policies and leadership. This heightened rhetoric further solidified the animosity.

It’s interesting to watch how quickly relations can sour. The initial post-Arab Spring enthusiasm for closer ties between Turkey and Egypt under Morsi was short-lived. The subsequent political upheaval in Egypt fundamentally altered the geopolitical alignment, pushing Turkey and Egypt into opposing camps, not just ideologically but also in terms of regional influence, particularly in North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean.

However, in recent times, there have been tentative steps towards rapprochement, driven by a recognition of shared interests in stabilizing Libya and managing regional security. This demonstrates the fluid nature of international relations; what seems like an insurmountable divide today can be softened by pragmatic considerations tomorrow.

Israel: From Peace to Profound Distrust

The relationship between Turkey and Israel has historically been complex, marked by periods of cooperation and significant tension. For decades, Turkey pursued a policy of balancing its Muslim-majority identity with its secular state traditions and its strategic alliance with the West. This led to pragmatic ties with Israel, including military and intelligence cooperation.

The Deterioration of Relations:

• Gaza Flotilla Incident (2010): This event was a major turning point. Israeli commandos raided a flotilla attempting to break the blockade of Gaza, killing nine Turkish activists. This sparked outrage in Turkey, leading to a severe diplomatic crisis, expulsion of the Israeli ambassador, and a significant freeze in relations.
• Critiques of Israeli Policy in Palestine: President Erdoğan has frequently and strongly criticized Israeli policies towards the Palestinians, particularly concerning the occupation of Palestinian territories and actions in Gaza and Jerusalem. These public condemnations have often been met with strong responses from Israel, further exacerbating tensions.
• Regional Alignments: Turkey’s evolving regional policies, its outreach to Iran and Qatar, and its occasional positioning against some Gulf Arab states have also impacted its relationship with Israel, which has deepened its ties with countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia.
• Erdogan’s Rhetoric: Erdoğan’s fiery rhetoric, often employing strong anti-Israeli language, has created an environment where normalization is extremely difficult.

It’s a relationship that exemplifies how political events and ideological stances can dramatically reshape long-standing diplomatic and security arrangements. Turkey, once a key regional partner for Israel, has become one of its most vocal critics on the international stage. This has, in turn, led to Israel forging closer ties with Greece and Cyprus, creating a new regional dynamic that excludes Turkey.

Yet, similar to Egypt, there have been recent, albeit cautious, moves towards re-establishing diplomatic ties, including the appointment of ambassadors. This suggests a potential recalibration, perhaps driven by a shared concern over Iranian influence or the desire to stabilize the region. Nevertheless, the deep distrust and the unresolved issues surrounding the Palestinian question mean that this relationship remains fragile.

The European Union (and key member states like France and Germany): A Relationship of Conditional Partnership

Turkey’s relationship with the European Union is a long-standing and multifaceted one, characterized by a desire for full membership, periods of reform and progress, but also significant setbacks and growing disillusionment. While Turkey is not “not getting along” in the same way as with direct adversaries, the relationship is undeniably fraught with tension and has cooled considerably in recent years.

Challenges in EU-Turkey Relations:

• Stalled Accession Process: While Turkey officially remains a candidate country, accession negotiations have been effectively frozen since 2016. Key chapters remain blocked, and there is little prospect of progress in the near future.
• Rule of Law and Human Rights: The EU has repeatedly expressed concerns about the state of democracy, the rule of law, freedom of expression, and human rights in Turkey, particularly following the 2016 coup attempt and the subsequent state of emergency. Reports from the European Parliament and the European Commission highlight these concerns as major obstacles to closer ties.
• Foreign Policy Divergences: As discussed earlier, Turkey’s actions in the Eastern Mediterranean, its stance on Cyprus, its intervention in Libya, and its purchase of the S-400 system have put it at odds with several EU member states, most notably Greece, Cyprus, and France.
• Migration and Refugee Deal: While the 2016 EU-Turkey Statement on migration helped significantly reduce irregular crossings into Europe, it has also been a source of leverage and tension. Turkey has at times threatened to “open the gates,” and the EU’s fulfillment of its financial commitments has sometimes been a point of contention.
• Nationalism and Populism: In both Turkey and some EU member states, nationalist sentiments and populist rhetoric have made constructive engagement more challenging.

It’s a relationship that feels like a persistent, albeit often polite, disagreement. Turkey aspires to be a key partner, perhaps even a member, of the European club, but its domestic political trajectory and its assertive foreign policy have created significant friction with core EU values and interests. For some EU countries, like France and Germany, there’s a fundamental disconnect on issues of democracy and human rights, while for others, like Greece, the direct territorial and maritime disputes are paramount.

The situation is quite nuanced. Turkey is still a vital partner for the EU on issues like counter-terrorism, regional security, and migration. However, the aspirational goal of full membership has largely faded, replaced by a more pragmatic, but often tense, relationship based on managing mutual interests and disagreements.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE): A Newer Rivalry

The rivalry between Turkey and the UAE is a more recent development, emerging primarily in the last decade, driven by differing regional visions and support for opposing factions in various conflicts.

Key Drivers of UAE-Turkey Tensions:

• Ideological Differences and Muslim Brotherhood: Similar to Egypt, the UAE views the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliated movements as a threat to its own political stability and regional order. Turkey’s support for such groups, particularly during the initial post-Arab Spring period and its backing of Qatar during its blockade by several Gulf states, has been a major source of friction.
• Libya Conflict: The UAE has been a key backer of Khalifa Haftar’s LNA in Libya, directly opposing Turkey’s support for the GNA. This proxy conflict has been a significant point of contention, with both countries vying for influence in North Africa.
• Regional Power Competition: The UAE seeks to establish itself as a dominant regional power, challenging what it perceives as Turkey’s growing assertiveness and ambition to lead the Sunni Muslim world. This competition plays out in various arenas, from economic influence to military posturing.
• Diplomatic and Economic Measures: At times, tensions have manifested in diplomatic spats, with leaders exchanging sharp criticisms. There have also been reports of economic boycotts and efforts to limit Turkish influence in certain Arab countries.

This is a fascinating case of how regional power dynamics can create new fault lines. The UAE, with its significant financial resources and strategic vision, has actively sought to counter what it sees as the destabilizing influence of Turkish policies and its support for Islamist movements. The rivalry is deeply rooted in competing ideologies about the future of the Middle East.

Recently, like with Egypt, there have been signals of a potential thaw, with high-level visits and discussions aimed at de-escalating tensions and finding common ground, perhaps driven by the shifting geopolitical landscape in the Middle East. This illustrates the pragmatism that often governs international relations, where old rivalries can be set aside when new strategic imperatives emerge.

Saudi Arabia: A Relationship Strained by Regional Politics and Events

Saudi Arabia and Turkey have also experienced a period of strained relations, particularly following the assassination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018. This event, and the broader geopolitical competition in the region, significantly damaged ties.

Factors Affecting Saudi-Turkish Relations:

• Jamal Khashoggi Assassination: The murder of Khashoggi, a Saudi critic residing in Turkey, within Turkish territory, placed Turkey in a position of moral and political authority. Turkey’s thorough investigation and its decision to publicly share details of the assassination embarrassed Saudi Arabia and led to a severe diplomatic crisis.
• Regional Rivalries: Saudi Arabia views Turkey’s growing influence in the region, its support for groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, and its interventionist policies in countries like Syria and Libya as a challenge to its own leadership and regional order.
• Economic Friction: Following the Khashoggi incident and broader political disagreements, there were calls in Saudi Arabia for boycotts of Turkish goods, leading to a noticeable decline in Turkish exports to Saudi Arabia for a period.
• Qatar Crisis: Turkey’s strong support for Qatar during the blockade imposed by Saudi Arabia and its allies in 2017 further alienated Riyadh.

The Khashoggi murder was a watershed moment, creating a deep rift that went beyond typical diplomatic disagreements. It involved issues of sovereignty, justice, and a stark geopolitical challenge. Turkey’s handling of the investigation and its public statements put Saudi Arabia on the defensive.

However, it is also worth noting that, much like with the UAE and Egypt, there have been recent diplomatic efforts to mend fences. This is likely driven by Saudi Arabia’s own strategic reassessments and Turkey’s desire to re-engage with major Gulf economies. These diplomatic overtures suggest a pragmatic shift, where historical grievances are being navigated in favor of renewed cooperation, particularly in economic spheres.

Syria: A State in Turmoil and a Source of Instability

Turkey’s relationship with Syria is not one of a functioning bilateral relationship in the traditional sense, but rather one defined by conflict, instability, and a proxy war. Turkey has been a staunch opponent of the Assad regime in Syria, supporting opposition groups since the outbreak of the Syrian Civil War in 2011.

Key Aspects of Turkey-Syria Conflict:

• Support for Opposition: Turkey provided significant political, financial, and military support to Syrian rebel factions fighting against Assad. This put Turkey directly at odds with Russia and Iran, who are key allies of the Syrian government.
• Kurdish Militias (YPG/PKK): As previously discussed, Turkey’s primary concern in Syria is the presence and expansion of the YPG, which it views as an extension of the PKK. Turkey has launched multiple military operations (Operation Euphrates Shield, Operation Olive Branch, Operation Peace Spring) into northern Syria to push back YPG forces and establish control over border areas. This has often involved clashes with Syrian government forces or militias aligned with them.
• Refugee Crisis: Turkey hosts the largest population of Syrian refugees in the world (millions of people). This creates a massive socio-economic burden and has become a significant domestic political issue, influencing Turkey’s stance on the conflict and its desire for a stable, Syrian-controlled border region.
• Border Security: Maintaining border security and preventing spillover of conflict and terrorism has been a paramount national security concern for Turkey.
• De-escalation Efforts: Despite the animosity, there have been recent attempts, mediated by Russia, at de-escalation and dialogue between Turkey and the Syrian government, signaling a potential shift in dynamics, though full normalization remains distant.

The Syrian conflict has been a defining foreign policy challenge for Turkey, impacting its security, economy, and international relations. It’s a chaotic and dangerous environment where Turkey has had to contend with multiple actors, including the Syrian regime, Kurdish militias, ISIS, Russia, Iran, and the United States. The sheer complexity of this situation makes any semblance of a normal diplomatic relationship with Damascus virtually impossible for now.

Common Threads and Turkish Foreign Policy Assertiveness

Looking across these diverse relationships, several common threads emerge regarding what countries Turkey does not get along with, and why. These often involve a combination of:

• Historical Grievances: From the legacy of the Ottoman Empire to more recent conflicts, historical narratives and unresolved issues continue to shape present-day animosities.
• Regional Power Competition: Turkey, under President Erdoğan, has pursued a more assertive and independent foreign policy, seeking to increase its regional influence. This ambition often clashes with the interests of established regional powers and neighbors.
• Ideological Divides: Turkey’s support for Islamist movements (like the Muslim Brotherhood) has put it at odds with countries that view such groups as destabilizing, like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.
• Security Concerns: Turkey’s perception of threats, particularly from Kurdish separatists (PKK and its affiliates like the YPG), and its defense arrangements (like the S-400 purchase) have created significant friction with allies like the US.
• Territorial and Maritime Disputes: Issues in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Seas are perennial sources of tension with Greece and Cyprus, drawing in other regional and international actors.
• Human Rights and Democratic Values: Disagreements over democratic norms, rule of law, and human rights have strained relations with Western partners like the EU and the US.

It’s crucial to recognize that Turkey’s foreign policy under Erdoğan has often been characterized by a willingness to challenge the status quo and to pursue its national interests vigorously, even if it means diverging from its traditional allies or creating new tensions. This assertiveness is sometimes viewed as a sign of strength and a necessary reassertion of Turkish sovereignty, while at other times it’s seen as destabilizing and provocative.

Frequently Asked Questions About Turkey’s International Relations

How does Turkey’s geopolitical position influence its relationships?

Turkey’s unique geographical location, straddling Europe and Asia, and bordering volatile regions like the Middle East, the Caucasus, and the Black Sea, inherently makes its foreign policy complex. This strategic position means Turkey is involved in a multitude of regional issues and must balance relationships with a diverse set of actors. For instance, its proximity to Syria and Iraq necessitates a strong focus on border security and counter-terrorism, directly impacting its relations with the US and European powers over issues like the YPG. Similarly, its location in the Eastern Mediterranean puts it at the center of energy disputes and naval rivalries with Greece and Cyprus, which in turn involve the EU. This position means Turkey cannot afford to isolate itself from any major regional power bloc, forcing it into a constant tightrope walk of managing alliances and rivalries.

Furthermore, Turkey’s historical ties to various regions and its role as a bridge between different cultures and political systems also shape its interactions. It has a complex relationship with Russia due to shared borders and historical interactions, but also engages in cooperation on energy and defense while competing in other arenas like Syria and the Black Sea. The need to manage these diverse pressures often leads to a pragmatic, and sometimes contradictory, foreign policy where alliances can shift rapidly based on evolving national interests. This geographic imperative makes it essential for Turkey to maintain a degree of self-reliance and to pursue policies that it believes will best protect its sovereignty and economic well-being, even if it means challenging established norms or alienating traditional partners.

Why are Turkey’s relations with Greece so consistently strained?

The strain in Turkey’s relations with Greece is deeply rooted in historical grievances and a complex interplay of territorial and maritime disputes, particularly concerning the Aegean Sea. Both nations were once part of the Ottoman Empire, and their modern histories are marked by conflict and nationalist movements. The Greco-Turkish War of 1919-1922 and the subsequent population exchange left a lasting legacy of mistrust. Today, the primary points of contention are:

1. Aegean Territorial Waters and Airspace: Greece claims extensive territorial waters and an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) around its numerous islands, many of which are very close to the Turkish mainland. Turkey disputes the extent of these claims, arguing that the islands should not automatically grant such rights and that a more equitable division based on continental shelf principles is needed. This leads to disputes over airspace, flight paths, and naval patrols.
2. Militarization of Islands: Turkey views the heavy militarization of certain Greek islands in the Aegean as a violation of international treaties and a threat to its security, especially given their proximity to the Turkish coast.
3. Eastern Mediterranean Energy Resources: The discovery of significant hydrocarbon reserves has intensified these disputes. Greece, Cyprus, and Egypt have delineated maritime zones that Turkey argues exclude its own continental shelf rights and those of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Turkey’s active exploration activities in these disputed waters have led to naval standoffs and diplomatic crises.
4. Cyprus Issue: The unresolved division of Cyprus remains a significant irritant, with Turkey backing the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus while Greece supports the Republic of Cyprus.

These issues are not merely abstract diplomatic squabbles; they involve national security, economic interests (particularly energy), and deeply felt historical narratives on both sides. The constant potential for escalation, often fueled by nationalist rhetoric, means that the relationship remains perpetually tense, even though both countries are NATO allies.

What is the primary reason for Turkey’s strained relationship with the United States?

While numerous factors contribute to the strained relationship between Turkey and the United States, the most significant and persistent reason in recent years has been Turkey’s alliance with the Kurdish-led People’s Protection Units (YPG) in Syria. The US partnered with the YPG as a crucial ground force in the fight against ISIS. However, Turkey views the YPG as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a group designated as a terrorist organization by Turkey, the US, and the EU. Turkey fears that the growing influence and power of the YPG on its southern border poses a direct threat to its national security and territorial integrity. This divergence in strategic priorities – the US viewing the YPG as an indispensable ally against ISIS, and Turkey seeing it as a terrorist threat – has created a deep chasm in the alliance.

Beyond the Syrian context, other factors also contribute significantly to the friction:

• Turkey’s Purchase of Russian S-400 Missile System: This acquisition was a major blow, leading the US to remove Turkey from the F-35 fighter jet program and impose sanctions, citing concerns about its compatibility with NATO systems and potential risks to sensitive US defense technologies.
• Concerns over Human Rights and Democracy: The US has frequently raised concerns about democratic backsliding, freedom of the press, and human rights issues in Turkey, which have led to diplomatic friction.
• Divergent Regional Interests: On various regional issues, from the Eastern Mediterranean to the broader Middle East, Turkey and the US have often found themselves on opposing sides or with competing interests.

These issues collectively create an environment of mistrust and strategic disagreement, making the US-Turkey relationship one of the most complex and challenging for both nations.

Does Turkey have any fully amicable relationships?

Turkey maintains generally positive and cooperative relationships with several countries, though few are entirely without nuance or occasional disagreements. Some of its strongest partners include:

• Pakistan: Turkey and Pakistan share a close historical and cultural relationship, marked by strong political, economic, and defense ties. They often cooperate on international forums and have a shared perspective on many regional issues.
• Azerbaijan: Turkey and Azerbaijan have exceptionally close ties, often described as “one nation, two states.” Their relationship is characterized by deep historical, cultural, and linguistic bonds, as well as robust strategic and economic cooperation. Turkey has been a staunch supporter of Azerbaijan, particularly in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
• Some Central Asian Republics: Turkey has been actively strengthening its ties with countries like Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan, building on shared Turkic heritage and pursuing economic and political cooperation.
• Hungary: In recent years, Turkey and Hungary have developed a surprisingly strong relationship, often finding common ground on issues related to migration, national sovereignty, and a critique of certain EU policies.

While these relationships are generally strong and cooperative, it’s important to remember that in international relations, even the closest of allies can have disagreements on specific issues. The nature of these relationships is typically characterized by strategic alignment, economic partnership, and cultural affinity, with fewer fundamental geopolitical or ideological clashes compared to its more contentious relationships.

In conclusion, navigating the question of “what countries does Turkey not get along with” reveals a complex web of historical legacies, competing regional ambitions, and evolving geopolitical alignments. Turkey’s assertive foreign policy and its strategic location mean it is inevitably involved in numerous delicate diplomatic dances. While it maintains strong bonds with some nations, its relationships with others are marked by significant tension, making Turkey a central and often unpredictable player on the global stage.