OPIG

Europe’s Quest for Strategic Autonomy: The Idea of a European Army and Türkiye’s Role in the Future Security Architecture, by Bora Iyiat, examines the political foundations of European defence and the place Türkiye could occupy within it. Its central argument is that a European army requires more than weapons, coordinated procurement or a unified command. It depends on a shared understanding of security, political legitimacy and agreement on how sovereign powers should be exercised collectively. The report begins with the relationship between security, society and the state, drawing on Maslow, Hobbes, Hegel and Aristotle. It then surveys approaches to international security before adopting the Copenhagen School as its analytical framework. This perspective broadens security beyond military affairs to encompass political, economic, societal and environmental dimensions. It also explains how political actors frame developments as existential threats, seeking public acceptance for exceptional measures. Applied to Europe, this approach reveals why strategic autonomy is both a question of capabilities and a process of political transformation. The author connects the debate to Europe’s historical dependence on the United States and NATO, the consequences of the wars in the former Yugoslavia, and Russia’s actions against Ukraine. Changes in American strategic priorities and uncertainty within transatlantic relations strengthen the case for greater European capacity to act, while raising difficult questions about its relationship with the Atlantic Alliance. A common defence policy must also reconcile different national and regional priorities. Eastern European states place particular emphasis on the Russian military threat, whereas southern members give greater weight to Mediterranean instability, migration and terrorism. These differences shape spending, readiness and political consent. The report presents the European army debate as a test of whether separate security agendas can converge into a credible common strategy without ignoring national sovereignty. Türkiye provides the study’s geopolitical perspective. Although outside the European Union, it belongs to NATO and participates in security relationships linking Europe to the Black Sea, the Balkans, the Caucasus, the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East. Iyiat argues that Europe’s institutional boundaries do not fully match the geographical reach of its security interests. Türkiye’s potential role consequently depends on how European defence is defined: protecting the Union’s institutions or addressing the continent’s interconnected vulnerabilities. The industrial dimension reinforces this argument. Defence production, critical technologies, supply chains and strategic raw materials link economic resilience with military freedom of action. Türkiye’s capabilities in unmanned systems, land and naval platforms, ammunition and missiles offer areas of cooperation. Yet collaboration also requires political agreement on technology sharing, joint production, export controls and supply security. Europe’s pursuit of autonomy could encourage complementary partnerships or produce more restrictive arrangements for countries outside the Union. The report examines how political narratives influence cooperation on migration, border management and counter-terrorism. It advocates institutional dialogue where disagreements can be handled through politics, while recognising that concrete military threats still require deterrence. This balance is essential to building trust without weakening defence. The study’s contribution is to frame European strategic autonomy as an alignment of military capacity, political authority, shared threat perceptions and regional realities. For policymakers and readers of international relations, it offers a framework for assessing how European integration, NATO cooperation and Türkiye’s strategic position might shape the continent’s future security order.