Comment on Do You Throw Them Or Catch Them? Give Me your BRICS by rick

Parent Post: Do You Throw Them Or Catch Them? Give Me your BRICS · In Reply To

rick · 7/9/2025, 3:47:04 PM · permalink

**Pakistan: Ankara's ideological and strategic bridge**

Pakistan has long served as a foundational pillar in Ankara’s regional outreach. The bilateral relationship is reinforced by joint defense projects – especially in the manufacture of drones and armored vehicles – and a shared ideological framework between the AKP and Pakistan’s conservative Islamist elites.

Both countries have jointly championed Muslim causes to varying degrees, including Kashmir and Palestine. More discreetly, Islamabad plays a mediating role in Turkish–Bangladeshi coordination, smoothing Ankara’s entry into Dhaka’s political scene. Through religious networks and Islamist media, Pakistan also helps lay the groundwork for Turkish influence in both Afghanistan and Central Asia.

This partnership extends to Northern Cyprus, where Pakistan has repeatedly affirmed its support. Shortly after the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) declaration in 1983, Pakistan was among its earliest recognizers, though it formally withdrew recognition under UN pressure within days.

Decades later, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif publicly declared that Pakistan “fully supports the cause of Northern Cyprus” and will “unwaveringly” stand by Ankara on the issue. This steadfast solidarity underscores the deep wherewithal of the Ankara–Islamabad axis, rooted in shared ideological commitments and mutual strategic interests.

**Turkiye's soft power architecture**

Ankara’s expansion into Eurasia is underpinned by a carefully curated soft power strategy. The Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency (TIKA) implements development projects across the education, health, and infrastructure sectors. The Turkish Religious Foundation builds mosques, funds religious centers, and offers Turkish-language Islamic education abroad.

Meanwhile, Turkish schools and universities overseas are producing a new cadre of elites aligned with Ankara’s political worldview.

In Bangladesh, these efforts are particularly visible in Rohingya refugee camps, where Turkish humanitarian outreach has helped embed a political presence under the guise of benevolence. These initiatives are not merely charitable; they are long-term investments in geopolitical loyalty.

**NATO synergy – and the Eurasian backlash**

Although Ankara frequently claims to pursue an independent foreign policy, its expansionist posture in Eurasia aligns neatly with key NATO objectives. In Tibet and Xinjiang, Turkish activity directly complements western efforts to contain China. In Afghanistan and Central Asia, Ankara’s presence encircles Iran. And in the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, Turkiye serves as a rival to Moscow’s residual influence.

Far from acting as a rogue state, Ankara is performing the role of NATO’s regional auxiliary. Its use of culturally resonant narratives – whether pan-Turkic or Islamist – makes its intervention palatable to local audiences, while serving long-term Atlanticist designs. This convergence of aims may explain western tolerance for Turkiye’s expansionist maneuvers, despite high-profile disputes over Syria and the Eastern Mediterranean.

Despite its gains, the Turkish project is not without limits. India views Ankara’s growing footprint in Bangladesh with rising alarm, particularly the circulation of the “Greater Bangladesh” map. China considers Turkish engagement in Tibet as a strategic provocation. Russia, reasserting itself in Central Asia, is unlikely to cede ground to Turkish competitors.

Moreover, local populations may resist Ankara’s ideological push, especially if they perceive political Islam as a foreign imposition. The risk of over-reliance on religious soft power is that it may alienate secular elites or provoke backlash from emerging regional blocs seeking to curtail Islamist expansion.

Turkiye’s eastward advance is not merely strategic – it is ideological. By fusing Brotherhood-aligned Islam with Turanist nationalism, and packaging both within a NATO-friendly framework, Ankara is methodically carving out a sphere of influence across Central and South Asia.

But this expansion is not without risk. It demands careful calibration: asserting regional power without provoking a backlash from entrenched powers like Russia, China, and India; projecting independence while remaining a functional pillar of the western alliance.

This is not just a bold manoeuver, but a provocation. Whether Turkiye can entrench its influence in this contested Eurasian theater or whether the contradictions of its dual alignment will force retreat is no longer a hypothetical. The outcome will shape the limits of Ankara’s ambition, and expose the fragility or resilience of the Atlanticist order it claims to defy.

https://thecradle.co/articles/how-turkiyes-eastward-ambitions-serve-the-atlanticist-order

2 bumps

Signature