Bloomberg’s editorial board called for barring Turkey from the F-35 stealth fighter manufacturing program, imposing sanctions on it, and scaling down its role in any joint military activity in an editorial published on April 16.
The Bloomberg editorial board’s violent reaction followed Turkey’s purchase of the Russian S-400 missile-defense system.
According to the authors, the S-400 could shoot down NATO fighter jets, and the involvement of Russian experts in the missile defense system in Turkey could give Russia insight into U.S. technology, including what is used in the F-35 stealth fighter.
“Turkey’s latest incitement can’t go unanswered. By defiantly buying a Russian missile-defense system, Erdogan has gone too far,” the Bloomberg editorial board wrote.
The authors also wrote that, although Turkey has historically been important in countering “NATO’s biggest security concerns,” like Russian expansionism and Islamic terrorism, Turkey’s sense of centrality is inflated. The Bloomberg Editorial Board believes that Turkey, “far from being a bulwark against Russia,” has strengthened its economic ties with Moscow, while its fight against terrorism has never extended beyond its own interests.
“Membership of the Western alliance is by far the better option for Turkey. But it requires respecting the group’s collective concerns. Erdogan needs to show that he does,” the Bloomberg editorial board concluded.
Turkey’s purchase of the Russian S-400 system has met severe criticism from the US, including threats of sanctions and withdrawal from military technical cooperation. In response, the president of Turkey said that buying S-400 is his country’s sovereign right.
The comment is in line with the West’s new cold war against Russia.
It should be noted that everything has been said in an absolutely straightforward manner: Turkey was supposed to become a bulwark against Russia, which NATO perceives as one of two major threats. Instead, Turkey dared to make a step towards Moscow? This was wrong; Turkey should have stayed with the US and NATO. Otherwise, Turkey must be punished severely and quickly!
The fact that the statement was made by a private financial company demonstrates the level of the anti-Russian hysteria in the West.
It should also be noted that the authors are accusing Turkey of pursuing its own interests. Apparently, it is implied that Turkey must act in the best interests of NATO and the United States, even at the cost of its own national interests. But if national interests are no longer the basis of a national policy, then must there not be a reason for that? What should policy be based on if not on national interests? An alternative way to pose this question is: what kind of an image of Russia is being created in the West today if unwillingness to counter Russia becomes “criminal” even when a war against Russia (a cold one so far) does not meet the national interests of a sovereign country?
Source: Rossa Primavera News Agency