Turkey's response to threats of weapons of mass destruction
Lavoy, Peter R.
MetadataShow full item record
Unlike most of its NATO allies, Turkey did not emerge from the Cold War with enhanced security. The acquisition of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missiles by its neighbors in the Middle Eastâ Iran, Iraq and Syriaâ creates a serious security concern for Turkey. This thesis analyzes the numerous threats posed to Turkey by its neighborsÎ± nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and their ballistic missiles. It evaluates TurkeyÎ±s defense options to counter these threats and examines the credibility of NATOÎ±s security guarantees, including the nuclear guarantees the United States provides under NATO auspices. The thesis concludes that Turkey must acquire the capabilities to deny adversaries the benefits of these weapons. These capabilitiesâ including passive and active defenses as well as improved counterforce meansâ will enable Ankara to strengthen deterrence and provide an effective defense should deterrence fail. Improving its preparedness for WMD contingencies should be an urgent, new priority for Turkey. The Turkish Armed Forces should have the necessary capabilities to fight, survive and prevail in NBC environments. In addition, NATOÎ±s security guarantees, which hinge ultimately on the U.S. nuclear presence and U.S. extended deterrence commitments in Europe, and TurkeyÎ±s own national defense and deterrence posture, must remain convincing to Turkey as well as to the WMD-armed states that threaten Turkey.
RightsThis publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Robinson, George M. (Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2003-12);The National Security Strategy of 2002 suggests that the United States has determined that when faced with the threat of attacks from actors in possession of weapons of mass destruction, a strategy of deterrence is not ...
Wirtz, James J. (2018);Nuclear and conventional deterrence are in fact quite different in terms of theory, practice, and impact. The differences play out in various ways depending on whether strategies of denial, punishment, or retaliation ...
Gellene, David J. (Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 1992-06);The continuing efforts of several developing nations to acquire nuclear weapons indicates that the United States may be required to implement a deterrence policy aimed at authoritarian regimes in the Third World. Therefore. ...