The presence of nuclear weapons in Turkey has been a complex issue dating back to the Cold War. With recent tensions between Turkey the US, and other NATO allies questions have resurfaced about the status of American nuclear weapons stationed in the country. Let’s take a look at the history of US nuclear deployments in Turkey and examine the current state of affairs.
A Legacy of the Cold War
The origins of American nuclear weapons in Turkey trace back to the late 1950s and early 1960s, during the Cold War standoff between the US-led NATO alliance and the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact. Turkey joined NATO in 1952, and became a key strategic partner due to its control of the Turkish Straits between the Aegean and Black Seas.
In 1959, the US began deploying nuclear-capable Honest John missiles and nuclear bombs in Turkey under NATO’s nuclear sharing policy. The Soviet Union took notice, and saw the deployments as threatening
From 1961-1963, the US also stationed Jupiter intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Turkey, which became a major point of contention during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Soviet leadership considered the Jupiter missiles threatening. As part of the secret agreement that ended the crisis, the US removed the Jupiter missiles from Turkey.
But it maintained the deployment of tactical nuclear bombs in the country. At Incirlik Air Base, the US stored B61 gravity bombs for delivery by Turkish F-16 fighter jets. During the Cold War, this NATO nuclear sharing helped demonstrate alliance unity against Soviet threats.
Concerns Over the Security and Control of Nuclear Weapons
The presence of nuclear weapons in Turkey raised concerns in Washington even in the early years. There were worries that Turkish political instability could jeopardize control over the weapons.
During the 1960 Turkish coup d’etat, for example, US officials considered evacuating the nuclear weapons over instability fears. In the 1970s, the US removed its nuclear stockpiles from Greece as a result of tensions over Cyprus, while keeping weapons in Turkey.
Over the years, questions have persisted over who maintains effective control over the nuclear arms stationed in Turkey in practice. On paper, the US retains custody and control. However, Turkey’s direct access to the weapons as a NATO member has worried some.
The US does not maintain consistent nuclear sharing agreements with all NATO allies. For example, nuclear weapons were removed from Canada’s soil decades ago.
Erdogan Comments Raise Proliferation Questions
In recent years, comments by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan have raised concerns about Turkey’s nuclear ambitions. In 2019, Erdogan stated: “Some countries have missiles with nuclear warheads, not one or two. But [they tell us] we can’t have them. This, I cannot accept.”
His statements suggest Turkey may seek its own nuclear weapons capabilities in the future by resisting the terms of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Turkey has signed. Nuclear proliferation by additional countries would mark a major setback for global nuclear diplomacy.
During the 1960s, some Turkish officials independently looked into atomic bomb development. With current tensions, Turkey’s commitment to non-proliferation norms appears uncertain. Its continued hosting of US nuclear weapons serves as a hedge against perceived threats.
Status of American Weapons Amidst Strained Relations
In more recent years, political disputes between Turkey and other NATO members have raised questions about the status of American nuclear weapons stored in the country.
The weapons remained stationed at Incirlik as of 2019, though some analysts argued for their removal given strains in US-Turkey relations and periodic unrest in Turkey.
In 2016, the Turkish government cut power to Incirlik during unrest, temporarily halting US air operations. Some national security experts argued this demonstrated the potential risks of maintaining nuclear weapons there.
Others counter that removing the nuclear arsenal could undermine NATO’s nuclear sharing policy and alienate Turkey further. The weapons have remained in place as a symbol of NATO unity despite underlying tensions.
Their future status remains unclear given the complex triangle between the US, Turkey, and other NATO allies. Disagreements over Syria policy and Turkey’s human rights record, among other issues, continue to strain ties.
For over 60 years, nuclear weapons deployed by the United States in Turkey have served as a strategic asset but also a liability. Their presence demonstrates NATO’s nuclear sharing policy, but has also raised valid concerns about security, control, and Turkey’s long-term proliferation intentions.
With the US and Turkey at odds over regional issues today, the risks of keeping American nuclear weapons in the country appear higher. But removing them could also damage NATO’s unity and defense posture at a time of renewed great power competition with Russia.
The nuclear deployments remain both a Cold War legacy and a modern security dilemma without any easy solutions. An unstable Turkey combined with rising regional tensions make the current situation particularly volatile. Either keeping the nuclear arsenal or withdrawing it carries significant risks.
The future of American nuclear weapons in Turkey will continue to depend on the complex geopolitics between Ankara, Washington, and NATO in an increasingly volatile region. Their fate remains deeply uncertain.
What does these countries having nuclear weapons mean?
A single nuclear warhead could kill hundreds of thousands of people, with lasting and devastating humanitarian and environmental consequences. Detonating just 1 nuclear weapon alone over New York would cause an estimated 583,160 fatalities.
Combined, Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea possess over 12,000 nuclear weapons, most of which are many times more powerful than the nuclear weapon dropped on Hiroshima. Thirty-two other states are also part of the problem, with 6 nations hosting nuclear weapons, and a further 28 endorsing their use.
A tactical nuclear weapon is any weapon that’s not been classified as “strategic” under US- Russian arms control agreements. The Federation of American Scientists currently estimates Russian non-strategic nuclear warheads at 1,912, and approximately 100 U.S. non-strategic warheads deployed in five European countries. While these are often framed as “smaller” or “low yield” nuclear weapons, and it’s implied that they would cause less damage, these warheads can have explosive yields up to 300 kilotons, or 20 times that of the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.
Who has the most nuclear weapons?
Russia has the most confirmed nuclear weapons, with over 5,500 nuclear warheads. The United States follows behind with 5,044 nuclear weapons, hosted in the US and 5 other nations: Turkey, Italy, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. Total nuclear warheads owned by these 2 countries alone counts for nearly 90% of nuclear weapons in the world.
Total number of warheads for North Korea and Israel is unconfirmed. However, it has been estimated that North Korea has enough fissile material to develop between 40-50 individual weapons, whilst Israel has material for up to 200, with an estimated 90 existing warheads.
Why wasn’t there a Turkish Missile Crisis? (Short Animated Documentary)
FAQ
Does Turkey have a nuclear weapon?
When did America put nukes in Turkey?
What 9 countries have nukes?
Does Turkey have missiles?