On October 14, several European Union (EU) countries announced the suspension of fresh arms export licenses to Turkey over the latter’s ongoing offensive against the Kurds in northeast Syria. These individual country-level bans were issued by France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Finland, Czech Republic and Sweden.The decision was taken during an European Council meeting in Luxembourg. The bloc also used strong words to call out Ankara’s offensive in Kurdish enclaves in northeast Syria.“The EU condemns Turkey’s military action which seriously undermines the stability and the security of the whole region, resulting in more civilians suffering and further displacement and severely hindering access to humanitarian assistance,” part of the resolution says. A day later, the United Kingdom and Spain followed suit. Also read: Syria: Kurdish Forces Pull out of Besieged TownFrom the Council’s statement, it might seem that the bulk of the EU is deeply concerned about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in northeast Syria, hence the much-touted arms licensing ban. But things are much more complex than they appear.The EU has not formally embargoed arms exports to Turkey, but only limited it for now. After all, Turkey is not any other arms-importing country. It is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), and thus, a crucial European ally. A formal EU weapons embargo would have put Ankara in the same category of countries as North Korea, Iran and Venezuela. For a NATO ally to have been treated as such, things would get awkward pretty fast.Yet, at the bare minimum, it is abundantly clear that the major NATO powers value the Kurds as a reliable strategic partner in the Middle East, not least because of their frontal role in fighting the Islamic State or Daesh. And they are not willing to let US President Donald Trump’s reckless diplomacy harm an age-old relationship or set the tone for NATO’s line on the current situation. But beyond a limited suspension on arms export licensing and stern statements, do the European arms-exporting countries really care about limiting Turkey’s capacity to undertake cross-border aggression?To answer this question, one must look into the specifics of the current ban by EU countries on Turkey. Almost every European government that has embargoed fresh licensing of arms to Ankara has done so only for those types of weapons that they believe “could be used by Turkey in Syria”.For instance, the french minister of armed forces said, “Pending the cessation of the Turkish offensive in North-East Syria, France has decided to suspend any plans to export to Turkey war materials that could be used in the context of this offensive.” Berlin and London have made similar statements.But how does an arms-exporting country ensure that Turkish forces don’t use the pre-existing supplies in their assault against the Kurds in Syria? It appears there is no clear answer. Also read: Pence, Erdogan, Kurdish SDF Agree to 120-Hour Ceasefire in SyriaLast year, on being asked in the UK parliament whether any British-supplied weapons were being used by Ankara in its offensive against the Kurdish-held Syrian enclave of Afrin, British Conservative MP and the then minister of state (foreign and commonwealth office), Alan Duncan, said that the government could not “categorically state that UK weapons are not in use” in Afrin. There was also incontrovertible evidence of German tanks being used by Turkish forces in Afrin, prompting Berlin to revoke a tank upgradation plan requested by Ankara. An Italian arms manufacturer, Leonardo, that runs a factory in Edinburgh and was partially financed by the Scottish government, made the laser technology used by Turkish F-16s to bomb Afrin.Essentially, arms export is a complex domain that involves a layered production and supply chain. It is often difficult to ascertain the exact route from the factory to the end user, and even more so, establish accountability for the actions of the end users vis-a-vis the supplying firm or licensing country. Thus, despite well-established defence export regulations within the EU and pre-approval assessments, individual member states often find it difficult to determine with certainty the theatres of combat that their weapons are deployed in.In the wake of the current Turkish offensive in northeast Syria, the German foreign minister, Heiko Maas, informed the media on October 13 that Berlin has adopted a “very restrictive line on arms exports since 2016 and in particular since the Turkish military campaign in Afrin at the start of 2018″. The British international trade secretary, Liz Truss, also said that London has “for some time, been carefully considering export licence applications for Turkey in light of Turkish activities in Syria”.Yet, there is no coherent understanding of what constitutes a “restrictive” or “carefully considered” arms export policy, and whether European governments have been consistently maintaining such a policy. Also read: Divided UN Fails to Agree on Turkey’s Syria OffensiveFor instance, despite the January 2018 Turkish offensive in Kurdish-held Afrin, which German Chancellor Angela Merkel condemned, Berlin continued to sell arms to Ankara. While according to data released by its Ministry of Economy in September 2018, Germany’s arms exports to Turkey dropped from nearly 10 million to 4.4 million Euros since the Afrin offensive, recent figures reported by German press agency, DPA, on October 17 indicate a dramatically reverse trend – German arms exports to Turkey in just the first eight months of 2019 amounted to 250.4 million Euros, the highest since 2005. Moreover, on being recently asked by the media whether the current ban entails any real qualitative change from the pre-existing restrictions on arms exports to Turkey, the spokesperson for the German foreign ministry said that he cannot divulge any information on “individual deliveries”, thus leaving some ambiguity on its arms export policies to Turkey.Last year May, Middle East Eye revealed that the UK had sold weapons worth $1 billion to Turkey since the violent repression of an apparent coup attempt against Turkish strongman, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. According to SIPRI data, during 2011-18, four European countries – Spain, Italy, the Netherlands and Germany – were amongst the top six arms exporting European countries to Turkey, approving licenses worth a total of around $1.88 billion. Of this, arms worth almost $800 million were sold just during 2016-18, despite Erdogan’s brutal crackdown after the “coup” in 2016. Erdogan addresses an audience at the Turkish police special forces base damaged by fighting during a coup attempt in Ankara, July 29, 2016. Credit: Kayhan Ozer/Courtesy of Presidential Palace/ReutersItaly has emerged as the largest arms supplier to the Erdogan regime, with Rome approving licenses worth $409 million in 2016-18, almost double the amount approved by the next biggest supplier during that period, Spain. But thanks to the lack of publicly available information, there is little clarity on what quantum of Italian and Spanish military hardware was used by Turkish forces in its 2018 Afrin offensive or is being used in the ongoing offensive.Also read: Turkey Unleashes Offensive Against Kurds in Northern SyriaThere is little doubt that the continued supply of weapons by European powers to Turkey only serves to bolster Erdogan’s militaristic, authoritarian regime at home and its aggressive military cross-border campaigns against the Kurds. In many ways, it is the European military-industrial complex that continues to drive this relationship, with NATO member states finding it difficult to shut down weapons-manufacturing factories that bring large profits and employ many.More importantly, for NATO, Turkey will remain a geo-strategically indispensable ally, at least for the near future, despite Erdogan’s rapidly growing intimacy with Russia and his anti-Kurdish agenda. Sure, the relationship is awkward as ever, but critical for a Europe that doesn’t want to give up on its time-tested bridge to the Middle East.The costs of this realist equation can be drastic – particularly as Washington doubles down on its unpredictability and Erdogan becomes even more confident in pursuing his dangerous agenda in the region. If Europe doesn’t walk the talk, many more fires will be fanned and lives lost.Angshuman Choudhury is a senior researcher at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS), New Delhi, and currently, visiting fellow at the German Institute of International and Security Affairs (SWP), Berlin.
