Embracing the Sultan of constant betrayal by Marja Heikkinen

European democratic ethics have long been a beautifully crafted illusion, a mirage of principles and values that dissolve the moment power and convenience dictate otherwise. The European Union, that supposed bastion of human rights and democratic ideals, has once again exposed the fragility of its moral compass by extending its so-called defence umbrella over none other than Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the very man who dances with despots at dawn and stabs them in the back by dusk. A leader who, in the same breath, courts Vladimir Putin, flirts with Donald Trump, and schemes with Benjamin Netanyahu, all while keeping one hand firmly clenched around Europe's throat, ready to squeeze the moment it suits his grand imperialistic fantasies.

One has to wonder, how did we get here? How did a man who systematically dismantles democracy in his own country, imprisons journalists, crushes dissent, and weaponizes refugees against the EU, become someone the European establishment finds worthy of inclusion in its security framework?

This isn’t about Turkey as a country or its people, who have long suffered under Erdoğan’s autocratic rule. This is about the deliberate amnesia and moral cowardice of European leaders who, despite knowing his track record, continue to entertain him as a strategic ally. European leaders who still act as though the NATO framework or geopolitical necessity somehow justify their selective blindness.

Let’s be blunt: Erdoğan is not a partner. He is a transactional player who thrives on chaos and deception. One day, he pretends to be a mediator in conflicts; the next, he is supplying drones and weapons to one of the warring factions. One morning, he shakes hands with European leaders, pledging cooperation; by nightfall, he is threatening to unleash waves of migrants onto European borders, using human lives as bargaining chips.

And yet, Brussels, Berlin, and Paris keep playing along. They offer him trade deals, defence partnerships, and even discussions about renewing ties, pretending not to see the political prisoners in Turkey, the crumbling institutions, and the glaring human rights violations. The same Europe that preaches about values, principles, and human dignity turns a blind eye when those values become inconvenient.

Why? Because European ethical standards are often little more than a mask for economic and strategic interests. Because the EU, despite all its grand statements, is ultimately spineless when faced with strongmen who understand the power of blackmail. Erdoğan has mastered this game, threatening to block Sweden’s NATO accession, demanding concessions for every diplomatic step, and positioning himself as the indispensable rogue element in a world where predictability is dead.

The irony is glaring: Europe refuses to take serious action against Erdoğan while at the same time decrying the rise of authoritarianism worldwide. They condemn Putin’s aggression but tolerate Erdoğan’s endless provocations in the Mediterranean, his military interventions in Syria, Libya, and Nagorno-Karabakh, and his open support for radical groups. They fear what would happen if Turkey were pushed further into Russia’s arms, as if Erdoğan himself isn’t already playing both sides, milking NATO for defence while cozying up to Moscow for energy and strategic leverage.

The European Union loves to talk about defending democracy, yet here it is, embracing a leader who has spent the last two decades dismantling democracy in his own country. If Europe continues to give Erdoğan a free pass, if it continues to prioritize strategic convenience over democratic integrity, then it must stop pretending to be a moral authority. Otherwise, the only thing left of European democratic ethics will be the hollow speeches of bureaucrats in Brussels, words that sound noble but mean absolutely nothing.

Europe is standing at a crossroads. It can either uphold its values or continue enabling autocrats who will turn on them the moment they sense weakness. If history has taught us anything, it is that appeasement never ends well. The real question is: will Europe learn before it is too late?