Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1843743697-scaled

Neocons take aim at Turkey

Hawks pushing for war and regime change in Iran have formed a new group to challenge Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Analysis | Washington Politics

Prominent neoconservatives and other hawks have set their sights on Turkey, announcing a new Washington-based group “in response to Turkey’s recent turn away from democracy and toward authoritarianism” on Thursday.

The Turkey Democracy Project states that its mission is to “inform a policy towards Turkey that opposes its destabilizing behavior, supports genuine democratic reform, and holds the forces of corruption and oppression within Turkey to account.”

“For the better part of the last century, Turkey was a reliable ally and a model in the region of liberal ideals and cultural freedom,” the group says on its website. “But in recent years, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has dramatically altered Turkey’s position in the international community and its status as a free and liberal democracy.”

Turkey has been a U.S. ally since the end of World War II, but its democratic record is spotty. The Turkish military has overthrown several democratically-elected governments, and parts of the country have been under on-and-off martial law since the Kurdish uprising of the 1980s.

The Turkey Democracy Project includes several prominent members of United Against Nuclear Iran, a group whose members have called for the U.S.-led overthrow of the Iranian government, as well as the hawkish former White House national security adviser John Bolton.

The new anti-Turkey group is headed by UANI chief executive Mark Wallace. Its members include UANI chairman Joe Lieberman, former Florida governor Jeb Bush, retired Bush administration counterterrorism official Frances Townsend, career U.S. diplomat Alejandro Wolff, retired CIA officer Robert Richer and former UANI senior advisor Norman Roule.

UANI megadonor Thomas Kaplan helped co-found Justice for Kurds, another group dedicated to pushing back on Turkey’s influence. Kaplan is not listed as a member of the Turkey Democracy Project.

The creation of the Turkey Democracy Project is the latest sign that Ankara has shifted from a favored ally of U.S. hawks to one of their major bugbears. It would not be the first time American hawks turned on a former U.S. sidekick; in the 1980s and 1990s, Republican administrations went from backing Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s war against Iran to pushing for a U.S.-led regime change campaign against him.

Turkey had long served as the eastern flank of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and a key outpost for U.S. operations in the Middle East. The Turkish military purchased $16.6 billion in American weapons from the end of the Cold War to 2021, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute arms trade database.

But the Erdoğan government has run afoul of Washington in recent years. It has picked fights with European allies over energy resources, bought Russian missiles, taken a hardline stance against Israel, and allowed U.S. rivals to evade economic sanctions.

The most dramatic confrontation took place in October 2019. While the Trump administration had hoped to enlist Turkey as a partner in the Syrian civil war, Turkey instead attacked U.S.-backed Kurdish forces, creating a humanitarian crisis and embarrassing the United States.

Bolton, who left the White House shortly before the crisis unfolded, had taken an antagonistic stance towards both Turkey and the Kurds. In his memoirs, he compared Erdoğan to Italian fascist leader Benito “Mussolini speaking from his Rome balcony,” but also called left-wing Kurdish fighters a “terrorist group.”

With his new Turkey-focused group, Bolton is softening his tone on the Turkish state’s opponents.

“In addition to persecuting those Kurds who live within Turkey’s borders, Erdogan has attacked Kurdish targets in Syria and Iraq,” the Turkey Democracy Project states. “Turkey is also targeting the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) — the United States’ most reliable partner in Syria and the coalition most responsible for the demise of ISIS.”


ANKARA, TURKEY - 24 OCTOBER 2020: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (Photo: Nuno21 via shutterstock.com)
Analysis | Washington Politics
Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare
Top photo credit: Seth Harp book jacket (Viking press) US special operators/deviant art/creative commons

Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare

Media

In 2020 and 2021, 109 U.S. soldiers died at Fort Bragg, the largest military base in the country and the central location for the key Special Operations Units in the American military.

Only four of them were on overseas deployments. The others died stateside, mostly of drug overdoses, violence, or suicide. The situation has hardly improved. It was recently revealed that another 51 soldiers died at Fort Bragg in 2023. According to U.S. government data, these represent more military fatalities than have occurred at the hands of enemy forces in any year since 2013.

keep readingShow less
Trump Netanyahu
Top image credit: President Donald Trump hosts a bilateral dinner for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Monday, July 7, 2025, in the Blue Room. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The case for US Middle East retrenchment has never been clearer

Middle East

Is Israel becoming the new hegemon of the Middle East? The answer to this question is an important one.

Preventing the rise of a rival regional hegemon — a state with a preponderance of military and economic power — in Eurasia has long been a core goal of U.S. foreign policy. During the Cold War, Washington feared Soviet dominion over Europe. Today, U.S. policymakers worry that China’s increasingly capable military will crowd the United States out of Asia’s lucrative economic markets. The United States has also acted repeatedly to prevent close allies in Europe and Asia from becoming military competitors, using promises of U.S. military protection to keep them weak and dependent.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Top image credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Do we need a treaty on neutrality?

Global Crises

In an era of widespread use of economic sanctions, dual-use technology exports, and hybrid warfare, the boundary between peacetime and wartime has become increasingly blurry. Yet understandings of neutrality remain stuck in the time of trench warfare. An updated conception of neutrality, codified through an international treaty, is necessary for global security.

Neutrality in the 21st century is often whatever a country wants it to be. For some, such as the European neutrals like Switzerland and Ireland, it is compatible with non-U.N. sanctions (such as by the European Union) while for others it is not. Countries in the Global South are also more likely to take a case-by-case approach, such as choosing to not take a stance on a specific conflict and instead call for a peaceful resolution while others believe a moral position does not undermine neutrality.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.