Long thread warning

The developments unfolding in eastern Ukraine are a very complicated and complex issue for Turkish foreign policy on many levels. Ankara's relationship with Kiev has blossomed over the past decade. Bilateral trade is quickly increasing, with a $10bn target. https://twitter.com/Doranimated/status/1380967378754895873

A free trade agreement is in the works. Both sides have agreed on passport-free travel and their is strong defense industry cooperation as well ranging from drones, corvettes and jet engines. The Crimea issue is also very important as Turks view Crimean Tatars as their brethren.

On the other hand you have Russia, a country that is an important economic partner and projects power in many areas Turkey does. Many Americans want to see the Turkey-Russia relationship as black and white but the reality is its many shades of grey.

On a bilateral level there are many areas of cooperation ranging from defense industry and tourism to energy and agriculture and this adds depth to the relationship. But, there are also serious flashpoints like the annexation of Crimea and Moscow's support for Assad.

These divergences and competition in the same region will always keep Turkey from acting in a bloc formation with Russia or being part of a Russian camp. But, strong economic, defense and energy interests will limit Turkey's risk appetite to take strong action against Moscow.

The US needs to distinguish between the bilateral nature of the Turkey-Russia relationship and the clashing of their foreign policies in different theaters. Unless Washington can provide serious economic alternatives for Ankara, it needs to be more flexible.

Then there's the NATO dimension to what's unfolding in eastern Ukraine. I believe this will be one of the biggest tests for the alliance. After the diplomatic beaten by the Chinese in Alaska and strong posturing by Beijing towards Taiwan - Putin is testing NATO in Ukraine.

Is the Alliance strong, can it back up its rhetoric and is it dynamic? Is Biden the coalition builder he claims to be? Moscow has made inroads with NATO member states. Nordstream 2 is important for Germany's energy security, the Russia-France relationship is growing as well.

As the world shifts to a multipolar order, more and more NATO members will inevitably establish and improve their relations with Moscow and Beijing. Biden has a lot of work to do to shore up the alliance. I think the UK will be an important X factor for NATO.

The US will need a decisive UK standing next to it to revive the alliance. If eastern Ukraine heats up, I do not expect Turkey to directly involve itself in a kinetic engagement against Russia in support of Ukraine. If we look at the past 5 years ie. Syria and Libya,

Turkey has kept military engagement with Russia on a proxy level and avoided direct confrontation. This has provided room to manage the relationship through difficult times. But, if NATO decides to take action and give strong support to Ukraine,

And there is wide participation then this could open the door for Turkey to participate under the NATO umbrella. Turkey has taken part in Rapid Trident drills before and its geopolitical location on the Black Sea and the Bosphorus is strategic.

Transit through Turkey's straits are very important for Russia as they're the only outlet to the Med. The Montreuax Convention Regarding the Regime of Straits has been discussed in Russian media over the past couple days especially with US warships set to enter the Black Sea.

It's also important to look at events from a Russian perspective as well. Moscow sees NATO presence constantly expanding towards its borders and naturally they view it as a nation security threat. If this tense situation is to be diffused diplomatically, empathy is necessary.

It's been a long thread and if you're expecting a fantastic policy recommendation from me to solve this, sorry to disappoint. This situation is very complicated and multi-dimensional. Geopolitically its much bigger than just a Ukraine-Russia issue.

This is a test of NATO's deterrence capacity and capabilities. If the alliance fails this test, it will have future ramifications on Baltic security and the enhanced forward presence of the alliance.

The quicker Washington starts accepting multipolar realities, the quicker it can begin to recalibrate the alliance. The US needs to have sincere conversations with its allies and go back to looking at the big picture. The simplest example is CAATSA.

Turkey currently has sanctions imposed on it. India and Egypt and NordStream 2 which is important for Germany's energy security may soon be sanctioned as well. How can the US hope to contain Russia and China when your sanctioning your strongest allies in Europe, North Africa,

The Middle East and Southeast Asia? Who is Washington going to work with? I don't want to get carried away and turn this into a CAATSA thread. But, actions like this and the asymmetric nature the US conducts diplomacy is eroding confidence in its leadership.

The EU is already establishing a policy based on strategic autonomy and Turkey has its own independent foreign policy. For NATO to become effective the US needs to take its allies positions into account.

In 9 days it will be 3 months since Biden was sworn in as POTUS. He has yet to call the President of NATO's second largest army. During this period, Putin has called Erdogan 3 times and had a video conference and the Chinese Foreign Minister visited Turkey.

While the US sleeps, its rivals are working overtime. Relationships don't magically heal themselves. Both Russia and China are important countries for Turkey. They are blossoming relationships. But, that doesn't change the fact that Turkey has been a NATO member for 7 decades.

NATO is still very deeply ingrained into Turkey's DNA and its threat perception is still inline with the transatlantic views. Ukraine and especially Crimea, are very important security issues for Turkey. Rallying the alliance over these issues can reactive that DNA.