On August 30, 2024, NATO’s Allied Land Command, headquartered in Izmir, shared a post on its social media accounts marking the 102nd anniversary of the Republic of Turkey’s Victory Day. However, calling it a “celebration” might not be entirely accurate, as the content of the post sparked considerable controversy.
A Series of Poorly Executed Messages
NATO and its subunits frequently share social media posts celebrating national holidays and special occasions of member states, and Turkey is no exception. However, this year’s Victory Day post became a subject of debate due to its wording and the images used. The first notable issue in the post by NATO’s Allied Land Command was the language:
> “Today, we observe the Victory and Turkish Armed Forces Day of our host nation.”
Turkey’s name was omitted, and instead, the term “host nation” was used. While this wording is technically correct given that the Allied Land Command is based in Izmir, it might not be immediately clear to those unfamiliar with the context that the post refers to Turkey.
Furthermore, instead of using the verb “celebrate,” the post used “observe.” While “observe” can also mean “to celebrate” in certain contexts, combined with other issues in the post, it raises suspicions that this word choice was deliberate.
The selected image further fueled controversy. It depicted a Turkish soldier standing guard in front of Afrin Hospital. However, the hospital sign, which should have been present in the image, was erased. Additionally, the people entering the hospital did not match the typical Turkish demographic. If the photo was edited enough to remove the hospital sign, it is intriguing that similar edits were not made to adjust the demographic representation.
A Second Attempt That Only Worsened the Situation
Following widespread backlash, the post was taken down in the afternoon, only to be replaced with another problematic image. The text remained unchanged, but this time, a different photo was used—one showing a soldier standing guard in front of flagpoles displaying NATO member states’ flags. As a result, it became even more ambiguous which country the celebration was intended for.
A Pattern of Controversies Over the Past Three Years
This is not the first time NATO has mishandled Victory Day celebrations. In 2022, the Allied Land Command’s social media post was deleted following a direct complaint from Greece to NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg. Greece argued that celebrating a war between two NATO allies, in which one suffered defeat, was inappropriate and undermined alliance unity. The post was later re-shared under the title “Turkish Armed Forces Day,” with the reference to Victory Day removed.
In 2023, Greece once again lodged a similar complaint. However, on that occasion, NATO did not remove the post.
Is NATO Anti-Turkey?
There is a widespread belief in Turkey that NATO operates as a rigid, hierarchical structure, often perceived as an extension of the United States. However, the reality is more complex. NATO functions as a consensus-driven organization where all member states have equal voting and representation rights. While this consensus model has caused difficulties throughout the Cold War, it also prevents the alliance from being controlled by a single power.
Nevertheless, this system does not eliminate internal power struggles among member states. Rivalries such as the well-known tensions between Turkey and Greece are not unique—similar competitions exist between Hungary and Romania, or even between the UK and France.
Among these rivalries, competition over image and reputation is one of the least overt yet most persistent battles. At first glance, NATO’s missteps regarding Turkey’s Victory Day may not seem harmful, but if repeated over time, they could significantly erode Turkey’s reputation. While there is no concrete evidence linking Greece to this year’s controversy, the fact that both Victory Day posts contained clear flaws raises reasonable suspicions of ill intent.
Strengthening Turkey’s Representation Within NATO
Turkey’s weak lobbying efforts have long been a subject of discussion. This shortcoming is particularly evident in responding to allegations of the so-called Armenian genocide, where Turkey struggles to influence decision-makers effectively. However, lobbying is not limited to high-level governmental corridors. Securing positions in non-decision-making but influential roles is just as crucial. After all, a single social media specialist’s post from an official account can be enough to tarnish a country’s image—without requiring a powerful and well-funded lobbying effort.
To address this, Turkey’s presence in NATO should not be limited to diplomatic and military roles. Increasing civilian personnel within NATO’s various branches could help prevent such incidents. However, these job opportunities are not well-known in Turkey, leading to key positions being filled by personnel from other countries. Therefore, promoting NATO’s internship and job postings more widely—particularly in Turkish universities—should be prioritized to encourage greater Turkish participation.
Sources:
https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/dunya/yunanistan-tepki-gostermisti-nato-30-agustos-paylasimini-sildi-42129574
https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/30-agustos-kutlamasini-silen-nato-komutanligi-yeniden-mesaj-yayimladi/2674773
https://www.indyturk.com/node/658096/dünya/yunanistan-natonun-30-ağustos-zafer-bayramı-paylaşımını-şikayet-etti
