Nilgiri, I get the overall point you're trying to make but it seems like even if we ignore everything else about NATO, India vs. Turkey population size, etc, the point is that CAATSA is being used inconsistently.
If you think that users here are attacking India because of this, you are incorrect. They are simply pointing out that the US is being completely hypocritical and further proving that the sanctions against Turkey weren't because of the S-400. Those were just an excuse.
We don't even have to use India as an example nor is anyone asking that the US sanction India. More like unsanction Turkey and stop pretending that slapping CAATSA on them was remotely justified in the first place.
Bro I get what you are saying.
No I didn't feel like anyone here is attacking India or anything like that.
I just feel its something much larger than CAATSA going on (CAATSA selective application to Turkey).
I mean sticking to CAATSA needs some questions answered first:
- Why no CAATSA bill for PRC? (Given far larger threat to US interests than Russia)
- What exactly is the project of scale (of F-35 class and size) that India is involved with US that it could sanction like it has with Turkey?
The whole thing was set up to be inconsistently applied.....so its better to go deeper and look at the basis of inconsistent application in foreign policy.
i.e why it is too reductive to compare countries in 1:1 way (across huge differentials and contexts) from that basic angle itself.
You would first need equivalencines in India w.r.t a 70 year long collective security alliance involving the US.
With things like incirlik air base and US nuclear weapon hosting times whatever scaled factor for India.
With that same leverage intensity then afforded, the US would not apply it if an Indian admin went for S-400 at the same point Turkey did?
In CAATSA-free alternate universe, do TR members really think/feel US would simply not have used other (F-35 denial) sanction measures (past legislature bill)?
I mean it could be executive action or another kind of (more specific) legislature bill instead of CAATSA which has become a tool for it merely.
The bigger thing to get to is understanding why US - Turkey relations have evolved to what they have now and what to then forum consensus on internally to direct toward/away with time optimally (given whats baked in inertia wise from prior/ongoing arrangements and prior/ongoing reliances)
Listing up hypocrite point rapsheet in foreign policy (against say any of the p5 or large population countries generally) is not going to be productive.
They are X large and Y powerful in comparison to most countries of the world. Such a thing by very nature of foreign policy exercise is correlated to their size and power....given how foreign policy core doctrine runs in human power+tribal psyche in the end.
It is the very thing in how US "switched" to PRC recognition (seeing they could use the sino-soviet split to some advantage) in the early 70s and a defacto low-key alliance of sorts even.
Doing that despite what PRC did (to itself and others) that US found egregious and worse for a good length of time just prior to it (in scales again many times that it does towards Turkey today...just by raw population differentials involved).
Between India and US I can list out a whole lot of stuff (that turk members here feel about CAATSA-F35-S400 kind of stuff) and far larger ones (as they probably feel about YPG-syria stuff w.r.t US).
Past, present and future....the real negative+hypocrite stuff relationwise...
A well read American foreign policy wonk could probably do the same from his end regarding India.
But what is the point really?
Simplistically say US (or country X) bad?...when its larger phenomenon underlying it all that is really the thing to get at and understand.
If US didnt exist in today's world, another would simply take its place and we are back to square one if we do rapsheet exercise.
It is important to see deeper than that.
i.e that foreign policy is collective-tribal-interests based....and confined/constrained by any number of things that take long time to steer/orient differently.
How do you log and keep in mind rapsheet (you build with another, especially w.r.t powerful ones)....but not have (self-damaging given the power differential that exists) outbursts about it....given realpolitik weight of things.
I mean you cannot just wish away the NATO inertia stuff and its realised impact within Turkey over time.
How not to get angry....recognising its better to stay calm, plan things well, grow things well... to get even...or at least the best chance of making it so.
I find Turkey's last couple decades of foreign policy handling overall very subpar...even full considering of the particular lousy set of cards its been dealt on that front in that timeframe (esp w.r.t syria).
That must be looked at and corrected rather than cycle a victim complex w.r.t a larger power using its leverage on something it developed longer term with you.
The overdone victim complex is exactly what the larger power relishes you doing as it shows to them hitting home on a weakness.
I mean how has Turkey created situation where US and Russia are BOTH on the same side on the southern border?...as
@GoatsMilk has queried multiple times on this forum.
The F-35 sanctions..."CAATSA et al"... is simply a cog in that larger miasma Turkey has demonstrably indulged and shown ineptitude on in foreign policy domain IMO.
