Turkey and Germany: Long-Lasting Relations in Defence

Germany and Turkey are friends and allies. For more than 50 years now, we have been standing together in NATO to protect the security of the Allied Nations. But if we look at today’s global and regional security situation, it is obvious that we are faced with different challenges to those in the days of the Cold War. We need to find answers to them, something which we have to achieve together for the benefit of both countries.

German-Turkish armaments relations can be characterized as a deep, long-standing equal partnership. We are closely associated in many bilateral and multinational projects. The German-Turkish Defence Armament Framework Agreement concluded in April 2009 will extend and strengthen our existing cooperation even further. The aim is to jointly improve our defence capabilities by making better use of existing resources, and – at the same time – to increase the efficiency of our armaments industries. Due to the large number of bilateral projects and the great importance of Turkey as a trusted partner nation, Germany sent a defence technology attaché to the German embassy in Ankara in mid-2010. The well-established economic and defence partnership with Turkey has great potential to become a strategic partnership.

 

Defence Turkey: As known, the unabated civil war in Syria is threatening the regional security. As per Turkey’s request, NATO has built a protection shield with the deployment of Patriot missile batteries, which are available at the armed forces of United States, Germany and Netherlands. Do you believe the deployment of these systems in Turkey degrades the conflict environment? Also, what do you think about Assad’s regime for future?

 

I have just visited the German PATRİOT Detachment in Southern Turkey. During that visit I had the opportunity to meet the Turkish camp commander and Governor Kocatepe in Kahramanmaras. I was impressed by the professionalism of both the German and Turkish soldiers as well as the civilian administration. They are all working closely together to protect Turkey.

The PATRİOT deployment proves NATO’s ability to react swiftly in a potential threat situation. It shows that the Alliance lives up to its core task of collective defence. The enhanced NATO Air Defence in Turkey is sending the right messages of determination, solidarity and deterrence into the region. This deployment is part of a comprehensive effort to prevent the escalation of the inner-Syrian situation into a regional conflict. The Syrian regime knows that NATO is united in our support for Turkey. We are determined to stay for as long as there is a need to defend Turkey’s territory and people against a potential threat. Let me point out that it is an exclusively defensive operation that is not intended to provoke Syria and supports neither offensive action against Syria by others nor the implementation of a no-fly zone. Stating that, it is obvious that we must monitor the situation and developments in Syria very closely.

Summing up, we need to find a political solution to the crisis in Syria. The dramatic security situation needs to be dealt with. Our focus is on preventing a further spill over into the region or at worst into the global arena. We are also worried that the state of Syria might disintegrate. A political solution needs to be found soon and we consider the UN to be the right body to find it.

 

Defence Turkey: We see that many American and European countries are slipping into recession and making military budget cuts. NATO has lately promoted a new approach called “Smart Defence” for efficient and effective utilization of its resources during such period. What do you think “Smart Defence” will offer to NATO as well as the allied countries? Could you please make a brief description on this approach?

 

Smart defence is aimed at capability areas that are critical for NATO, in particular those established at the Lisbon summit in 2010. They include important, force enabling capabilities like Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD), Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), maintenance of readiness, training and force preparation, effective engagement and force protection. For the purposes of Smart Defence, the Allied nations must give priority to those capabilities which NATO needs most, specialize in what they do best, and look for multinational solutions to shared problems. NATO may act as a mediator and facilitator, helping the nations to establish what they can do together at a lower cost, more efficiently and with less risk. 

As you correctly point out, most defence budgets are under pressure and some nations are being forced to take tough decisions on the abandonment of certain capabilities. When this happens unilaterally, the other nations in the Alliance come under an increased obligation to maintain those capabilities. Such specialization “by default” is the inevitable result of uncoordinated budget cuts. From our point of view NATO should encourage specialization “by design” so that members concentrate on their national strengths and agree to coordinate planned defence budget cuts with their Allies, while retaining national sovereignty for making their final decision. As a result we are certain that by working together, the nations can have access to capabilities they could not afford individually and achieve economies of scale. Cooperation may take different forms, such as a small group of nations being led by a framework nation, or strategic sharing by those who are similar or feel close in terms of geography, culture or common equipment. 

Working together as Allies also means seeking cooperation with players outside NATO. NATO and the EU are facing a similar challenge, that of reconciling the need for economising with a modern defence. NATO and the European Union, in particular the European Defence Agency, therefore are working together to avoid needless duplication. 

 

Defence Turkey: The Turkish economy has been achieving a stable growth in recent years on contrary to the global economic crisis and recession. Besides that Turkey is active in international arena. How do you consider Turkey’s status in NATO?

 

Turkey’s good economic development and clearly recognizable international involvement are well appreciated in Germany. For Germany, Turkey is an important partner within NATO, an alliance of 28 nations that defend their common security interests as equals where each member has the same weight in common discussions and decision-making.

Turkey’s importance for NATO is already reflected in the new Strategic Concept of NATO, where a major emphasis is on the south-eastern flank of NATO. The strategically important position of Turkey and the current situation within this region are underlining the role and relevance of Turkey for NATO and thus for Germany. Germany recognizes this role of Turkey for NATO and is at the moment actively showing solidarity by supporting Turkey’s security interests with PATRİOT weapon systems. 

 

Defence Turkey: Turkey stands out as a country to become an ideal base within EU borders for European security and defence policies in terms of its military capabilities and logistical aspects. Would Turkey’s long-awaited membership to EU create new opportunities for dealing with threats such as terrorism, spread of mass destruction weapons, regional conflicts and organized crimes, which are specified in European Security Strategy and encountered by EU?

 

Stability and peace within Europe and in its immediate neighbourhood can only be achieved through close cooperation between Europe and its partners. 

Turkey is an important strategic partner for the EU in general and in crisis management in particular. Turkey constitutes a bridge between Europe and Asia. Due to its geostrategic position and its influence in the region, 

Turkey is not only directly affected by events in the Middle East and Central Asia, but also possesses the political, economic and military means to influence developments there. 

As a NATO member, Turkey is the second largest troop-contributing nation to the EU Operation EUFOR ALTHEA in Bosnia and Herzegovina, operating under the Berlin-Plus Arrangements. In the framework of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), Turkey is furthermore contributing substantially to the EU civilian crisis management mission EULEX Kosovo. The Turkish contingent is one of the largest contingents of a third country participating in EULEX Kosovo and overall in CSDP.

In the complex times of cyber war, transnational organized crime and dependence on natural resources and their transportation, times in which borders are losing relevance, trustful relations can be a stability factor that makes an impact beyond regional boundaries. Turkey is a reliable and most effective partner in European armaments cooperation and has participated in several projects with European countries.

 

Defence Turkey: We see that aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the global terrorism is considered to be one of the most important threat risks and the security strategies are established over this phenomenon. What are your views on the rapid change of threat perception?

 

A nation’s threat perception is usually shaped by a wide array of possible risks. The truth is nonetheless that since the beginning of the 1990s, threat perceptions and risk assessments have changed dramatically. The single most important change was triggered by the September 11 attacks, which turned international terrorism into one of the most pressing concerns for international security.

Moreover, the overarching conflict scenario of a major stand-off between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, or between the USA und the Soviet Union respectively, has been replaced by much more complex threat scenarios. Rapid changes in power have led to more intrastate and interstate conflicts along with a rise in transnational risks. This is putting security policy to the test worldwide in completely new ways. This is even more true as risks are tending to overlap and having to be addressed simultaneously (e.g. weapons of mass destruction / WMD, international terrorism and failing states). 

In addition, the process of globalisation is affecting nations around the world. Societies are becoming more mutually dependent. Because of this, peaceful competition of ideas and views, an open world trade system and unrestricted transportation routes are of the utmost importance. These developments also involve new risks that, to a different degree, can have direct or indirect implications for external and internal security. Political and economic structures as well as critical infrastructure have become more vulnerable as a result. These threats originate from both state and non-state actors. Therefore we are nowadays confronted with “classical” military threats as well as asymmetrical threats such as international terrorism, cyber crimes and warfare and other kinds of organized crime.

In some countries, however, globalisation itself is perceived as a threat to cultural identity and as cementing inequality and is therefore being rejected or even actively opposed. Many of the new risks and security challenges accompanying globalisation are transnational in character, brought about by non-state actors, and are affecting our security even from great distances.

Poverty, underdevelopment, poor education, shortage of resources, natural disasters, environmental destruction, disease, inequality and human rights violations are just some of the factors that are providing a breeding ground for illegal migration and both secular and religious extremism.

They can thus become causes of instability and, in their most radical form, pave the way for international terrorism. In an increasingly interdependent world, these risks not only have an influence on countries in the immediate vicinity, but also affect the security of the international community as a whole in a variety of ways.

These new types of risks cannot, however, be countered solely or predominantly by military means. We must further develop and apply a true comprehensive approach that involves the use of political, civilian and military instruments. 

 

Defence Turkey: Do you think the recent technological solutions developed against such threats are sufficient for the rate of change in such threats? Is it possible to say there is a balance? Is it possible to remark on a different structure in order to respond easier to such changes while developing R&D solutions?

 

It is a fact that the attacker is usually one step ahead. Nevertheless, through appropriate, state-of-the-art foresight and scenario development activities,  well functioning “lessons learned” analyses from current operations, including the exchange of information with our partners in the EU and NATO, and the development of, say, modular technological solutions that are adaptable to different scenarios, a balanced response to new threats can be pursued.

Regarding the structures necessary to respond to a changing security environment, I must say that the structures we have in Germany, with a competitive defence industry and a broad range of think tanks and research establishments provide us the comprehensiveness and flexibility required to assess new threats and challenges and to develop new technological solutions within an appropriate time frame.

 

Defence Turkey: In 2011 Germany introduced an extensive reform plan with the intention to gradually reduce the number of military and civil servants, for the closure of several military bases and the establishment of smaller but more efficient army. Could you please make an evaluation on the final status of this restructuring plan? What will be the advantages of this restructuring for Germany in the long term?

 

The reorientation of the Bundeswehr is a challenge and an opportunity at the same time. It is much more than a mere reform. It is changing our Bundeswehr in its entirety – structurally, conceptually and capability-wise. We have to close the gap between tasks and resources. This does not mean doing more with less, but concentrating on the most relevant tasks and giving up less important capabilities in order to strengthen the most relevant ones. 

The aim of our reorientation of the Bundeswehr is to improve operational capabilities where necessary and possible, to make our forces more efficient and more robust. The first step we took, for instance, was to suspend the drafting of conscripts on 1 July 2011.

In a next step, the Ministry of Defence was reorganized and has been working in the new structure since 1 April 2012. This has not only been an adaptation. The MoD has been reorganized completely and its staffs have been downsized to currently 2,000 people. The service chiefs, who were directly subordinate to the Minister, are now subordinate to the Chief of Defence. 

Along with the restructuring of the MoD, we will be implementing a new set of processes, e.g. a new integrated planning process or armament and procurement process, and the new, leaner command structure will help to move more people from higher staffs into the operational structure. 

Another aspect that had to be adapted or changed respectively was our force structure regarding the specialization on defined tasks.

Formerly the Bundeswehr was structured in the three force categories: Response Forces, Stabilization Forces and Support Forces. By restructuring and integrating our previously three sets of forces into a single set, we are improving their flexibility and usability and our capability to escalate or de-escalate as required. For example, we will better be able to combine light and heavy forces, allowing more adequate force packaging in accordance with any given mission. Our force strength will go up to 185,000, composed of 170,000 career service personnel and 5,000 to 15,000 military personnel with short-term contracts of up to 23 months or reservists. We will be supported by 55,000 civilian employees.

Additionally, there will be much closer integration between military and civilian departments in the MoD and in many other higher agencies, the aim being to enhance the operational mindset of the whole organization. We will continue to develop our forces in line with NATO’s new Strategic Concept and our new Defence Policy Guidelines. This means that we will continue to make and partially improve our contributions to collective defence. 

We believe that we have found a way to cope with the current defence challenges most of the western nations are facing now or will do in the near future. 

We are willing to share our experiences and seek opportunities for future practical co-operation with anyone who is interested.

 

Defence Turkey: There has been a long-lasting and sound cooperation between Turkish and German defence industry companies. What do you think about the progress in our defence industry cooperation in recent years? Could you please evaluate the steps required to be taken for the improvement and strengthening of industrial relations currently and future? Do you have any expectations from the Turkish government on this subject matter?

 

Over the past two decades, the industrial capacities of Turkey have developed significantly. This change has also brought about a transformation of the procurement system. The focus has shifted from a preference for foreign imports to the involvement of Turkish industry.

Today, our two countries participate in demanding technological development projects as equal partners. This would not have been possible without trust and mutual respect at government level. The German government continues to be interested in strengthening and fostering the already very good relations with Turkey. For example, the national armaments directors from Turkey and Germany have had annual meetings now for several years. Another sign of mutual respect and our interest in enhancing cooperation is the fact that in 2013 these talks will be conducted for the first time at state secretary level.

The defence industry in Germany is organized on a private business and private law basis, so cooperation between the Turkish and German defence industries is primarily an issue of the Turkish and German companies. 

 

Defence Turkey: Do you have any further messages for our Defence Turkey readers?

 

I already had the opportunity to inform your readers in detail about German-Turkish armaments cooperation in the 2011 special edition. At the invitation of the Turkish Ministry of National Defence, this year’s joint committee meeting will be held in Ankara. I trust that we will be able to discuss new cooperation projects at this meeting.

I would also like to point out that we have been given permission to establish a temporary logistic transshipment point in Turkey. This transshipment point will grant us significantly greater flexibility for the redeployment of military materiel from Afghanistan to Germany. This facility is in fact a very good example of the potential for cooperation that exists between our two countries for other projects.

This and the significant efforts being made by Turkey with respect to host nation support and support for the German PATRİOT contingent illustrate the long-standing good and robust military and political relations that exist between our countries. Finally, the relations between Turkey and Germany are built on trust, mutual respect and understanding. And we share the belief that we need to continue this vital relationship for the benefit of both our countries.