How Erdoğan Turned the Iran War from a Predicament into a Political and Military Investment
The British newspaper The Telegraph argues that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan exploited the world’s focus on the confrontation with Iran to launch an extensive crackdown aimed at eliminating domestic opposition while simultaneously strengthening Ankara’s military and economic influence as an indispensable international ally and geopolitical power broker.
In its analysis of Turkey’s current political landscape, the newspaper concludes that Erdoğan has emerged as the “greatest long-term beneficiary” of the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran. According to the report, the regional conflict provided Ankara with unprecedented room for maneuver to accelerate what it describes as democratic backsliding and the suppression of domestic opposition, taking advantage of the international community’s distraction and its focus on regional military fronts without fear of significant international repercussions or sanctions.
According to the British newspaper, Erdoğan has not only consolidated power at home but has also used these developments to strengthen Turkey’s standing as an indispensable player on the global stage.
Domestic Repression Under the Cover of Geopolitical Shocks
The report begins by describing what it portrays as a dramatic illustration of Turkey’s growing security grip. Riot police equipped with heavy protective gear reportedly stormed the headquarters of the Republican People’s Party, Turkey’s main opposition party, in Ankara.
According to the account, police used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse supporters and protesters attempting to reinforce barricades behind the building’s glass doors. The operation was intended to forcibly remove party leader Özgür Özel, who was staging a sit-in protest against a Turkish court ruling that had removed him from office three days earlier. Observers described the move as an attempt to extinguish the remaining elements of civil and political freedoms in the country.
In this context, the newspaper cites Gönül Tol, founder of the Turkey Program at the Middle East Institute in Washington, who stated: “This is the ideal international environment for Erdoğan to carry out all these actions domestically. Successive geopolitical shocks provide him with both the confidence and the cover to do whatever he wants with what remains of Turkey’s democratic space.”
The newspaper argues that Erdoğan has skillfully capitalized on fractures in the international order, ranging from the continuing consequences of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 to the security and diplomatic vacuum created by declining confidence in the role of the United States under President Donald Trump.
According to Tol, this has led European countries, NATO allies, regional neighbors, and even African states to conclude that cooperation with the Turkish president is increasingly unavoidable.
Dismantling the Opposition and the Obsession with Political Survival
The report traces Erdoğan’s method of consolidating power over nearly a quarter-century, noting that he has consistently tightened his grip following major political challenges.
It highlights the 2013 protests and the failed military coup of 2016, both of which were met with forceful government responses.
According to the report, a similar pattern emerged following the mass demonstrations of March 2025 after the arrest of Istanbul Mayor and Erdoğan’s leading political rival, Ekrem İmamoğlu.
The Telegraph points out that İmamoğlu’s trial began only nine days after the outbreak of the war with Iran. The charges against him, described by critics as politically motivated and fabricated, include corruption and alleged leadership of a criminal organization in a case spanning approximately 4,000 pages and carrying theoretical cumulative sentences exceeding 2,000 years in prison—allegations that he strongly denies.
Despite the severity of these measures, the newspaper states that Western governments remained largely silent. Even the Labour Party, regarded as a sister party to Turkey’s CHP, reportedly refrained from public criticism.
According to the report, this aggressive strategy reflects the erosion of Erdoğan’s popular support due to economic difficulties. Inflation has reportedly remained around 50 percent since the 2023 elections, which Erdoğan won narrowly in a runoff.
With the 2028 elections approaching—or the possibility of early elections—Erdoğan is portrayed as seeking to neutralize political rivals before they can pose a serious threat.
In this regard, Yusuf Can of the Washington-based consulting firm Amena Strategics stated: “The Turkish government understands that it no longer possesses the popular momentum it enjoyed ten or fifteen years ago, and therefore resorts to authoritarian methods to completely dismantle the CHP.”
A Military Boom
Alongside domestic repression, The Telegraph highlights how Ankara has benefited from shifting security dynamics in the Middle East.
According to the report, countries across the region, concerned by Iranian missile strikes and what they perceive as shortcomings in American security guarantees, have increasingly turned toward Turkish military equipment.
The newspaper cites Iraq as an example, noting that Baghdad signed an agreement in May to purchase twenty Turkish air-defense systems in what it describes as a significant strategic shift.
The trend extends beyond the region. According to the report, concerns about China’s rise and Washington’s diversion of military resources toward the Middle East prompted Indonesia to become the first foreign customer for sixty Turkish Bayraktar Kızılelma combat drones, with deliveries scheduled to begin in 2028.
The report also notes the supply of two military support vessels to Portugal.
This surge has helped Turkey, which possesses NATO’s second-largest military force, rise to the position of the world’s eleventh-largest arms exporter.
According to Gönül Tol, Turkish weapons systems—tested in combat zones ranging from Ukraine to Libya—allow Erdoğan to market himself as a reliable ally.
She argues that “these defense partnerships strengthen his domestic legitimacy at a time when many question it, while simultaneously injecting much-needed financial resources into Turkey’s struggling economy.”
Ambitions Beyond Defense
Erdoğan’s ambitions reportedly extend beyond arms production. They also encompass transforming Turkey into a global hub for energy trade, transportation routes, and mineral transit networks.
The newspaper quotes a recent statement by Erdoğan following Özgür Özel’s removal: “Turkey’s goal is not to remain a spectator but to become a rule-maker in this competition.”
Experts cited in the report argue that achieving this objective requires neutralizing political opposition that could obstruct these plans.
As part of this strategy, Ankara has reportedly begun offering tax incentives that may include exemptions lasting up to twenty years in order to attract foreign investment and companies seeking to relocate from Gulf countries while benefiting from Turkey’s position under NATO’s security umbrella.
NATO Summit: Speaking from a Position of Strength
The Telegraph concludes by highlighting the transformation in Turkey’s position.
At the beginning of the conflict, Turkey appeared to be one of NATO’s most vulnerable members due to its proximity to Iran and sought to distance itself from the confrontation despite reports of missiles crossing its airspace.
However, by July, as Erdoğan prepares to host a major NATO summit, he is expected to speak from a position of strength, wielding influence and leverage that would have seemed unimaginable before the war began.
In the report’s closing remarks, Gönül Tol warns against what she calls “the excessive pragmatism of the West.”
She states: “The era in which NATO was viewed as an organization dedicated to protecting the democratic world has passed. Western allies will overlook democratic erosion and authoritarian consolidation in Turkey while focusing on technological and industrial interests such as drone production.”
Tol describes this approach as a serious political mistake, arguing that “authoritarian rulers always place regime survival above all else. When their power is threatened, they pay little regard to international treaties or commitments, ultimately making them unstable and unpredictable allies.”
