On October 11th, Irakli Martinenko and Zura Makharadze, hosts of the pro-Kremlin, extremist TV channel “Alt-Info,” discussed Georgia’s prospects for NATO integration and linked the process to the deployment of Turkish bases in Georgia:
Irakli Martinenko, host at Alt-Info: “By joining NATO, Georgia will integrate into Turkey. This is 2X2 = 4; everyone knows this except Georgia! “Georgia’s entry to NATO means the deployment of Turkish military units on the territory of Georgia, and this suits Turkey’s interests. This is Turkey’s strategy for the future!”
Zura Makharadze, host at Alt-Info: “Joining NATO means joining Turkey!”
The claim that NATO membership will result in the deployment of Turkish troops in the Georgian territories is false. Joining NATO does not cause the deploying troops of NATO or any other member state into the country’s territory. During peacetime, the armed forces of all NATO member states are under the control of their respective states and not NATO, and in need of urgent deployment of military forces, members of the Alliance make decisions by consensus.
Given the structure of NATO, the military forces of a member state, if necessary, act on the basis of an agreement among the member states. NATO procedures do not entail the deployment of NATO military bases in the territories of member states. NATO does not have its own army. In fact, the Alliance is a set of governance structures and defense capabilities that plan military operations involving member states’ armed forces based on an agreement between them.
The charter of NATO does not allow member states to deploy military force on the territory of another member state unless Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty is invoked. According to which, an attack on one NATO member state is considered an attack on the Alliance as a whole. In this case, too, a decision shall be taken by agreement between the Member States on whether the protection mechanism provided in Article 5 should be put in place. The use of Article 5 has occurred only once in the history of the Alliance, after the 9/11 attacks. Consequently, if Georgia becomes a member of NATO, it will take part in a similar decision-making process, which precludes the deployment of the troops of another member state, including Turkey, without its consent.
Similar disinformation, as if NATO membership in Georgia means the deployment of NATO, or specifically Turkish military forces in Georgia, has been disseminated by Kremlin-related actors in the past as well. The issue of NATO military bases is one of the targets of Russian propaganda, to which the Alliance has repeatedly responded. For example, in response to Russian propaganda about the opening of a NATO base in Georgia, on the Alliance’s website, we read that NATO bases are located only in the areas where the Alliance conducts its military operations, meaning that Georgia does not have a military base but a liaison office that cannot be considered a military base:
“The Alliance has military facilities in Afghanistan for the support of the Resolute Support mission, and in Kosovo for the KFOR mission. NATO has civilian liaison offices in partner countries such as Georgia, Ukraine and Russia. These cannot be considered as “military bases.” Individual Allies have overseas bases on the basis of bilateral agreements and the principle of host-nation consent, in contrast with Russian bases on the territory of Moldova (Transnistria), Ukraine (the Autonomous Republic of Crimea) and Georgia (the regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia).”
For more information regarding the myths about the deployment of Turkish troops in Georgian in case of NATO integration, see our articles:
- The Myth about EURO-Atlantic Integration Turning Georgia into a Turkish Military Base is Misleading
- Who Puts Equal Sign between NATO Integration and Deployment of Turkish Troops in Georgia?
The message about “Turkish NATO”, which equates the membership of the Alliance with the deployment of Turkish troops in Georgia, has been part of anti-Western rhetoric for years, which at the same time presents Russia as the only deterrent of the “Turkish intervention.” Read more:
The article has been written in the framework of Facebook’s fact-checking program. You can read more about the restrictions that Facebook may impose based on this article via this link. You can find information about appealing or editing our assessment via this link.