Iran conflict thrusts NATO’s southern flank to the centre of Alliance strategy

“I cannot think of any conflict in the region that can be resolved without Türkiye,” she told NOP NIGERIA. “Türkiye is a big country, an important player—not only for the region but for the globe.”

She said hosting the summit itself reflected Türkiye’s growing role at a time when tensions stretch from Ukraine to the Middle East.

Similarly, Erman Akilli, professor of international relations at Ankara Haci Bayram Veli University, argued that Türkiye’s expanding defence industry and technological capabilities have transformed its position within the Alliance.

“A stronger Türkiye means a stronger Alliance,” Akilli said.

He argued that Türkiye now contributes not only through its strategic geography but increasingly through indigenous defence technologies, artificial intelligence and innovation, all of which are becoming central to NATO’s long-term transformation.

Regional diplomacy within NATO’s strategic framework

While experts broadly agreed that the Middle East has become more central to NATO’s strategic thinking, they argued that the Alliance’s approach should combine collective defence with regional diplomacy rather than rely solely on an expanded military presence.

As NATO’s largest military power on its southern flank, Türkiye’s regional influence cannot be separated from the Alliance’s broader strategic presence. Ankara’s ability to engage simultaneously with NATO allies and regional actors has increasingly become one of the Alliance’s key strategic assets as instability stretches from Ukraine to the Gulf.

Serhan Afacan, director of the Ankara-based Center for Iranian Studies (IRAM), said Türkiye has consistently advocated the principle of “regional ownership” — the idea that countries in the region should play the leading role in resolving regional crises.

“Türkiye very much emphasises regional ownership,” he told NOP NIGERIA.

He said Türkiye’s comparative advantage lies in complementing NATO’s collective security role with sustained diplomatic engagement. Ankara’s ability to maintain dialogue with both Iran and Western capitals, while remaining firmly anchored within NATO, positions it as an important interlocutor in efforts to prevent wider regional escalation.

At the same time, Afacan noted that Iran continues to view Türkiye through the prism of its NATO membership.

“They say, ‘We have bilateral relations … but at the end of the day, you are a NATO ally,’” he said, underscoring that Ankara’s regional influence is inseparable from its role within the Alliance’s security architecture.

The combination of Türkiye’s strategic geography, military capabilities and diplomatic channels, analysts argued, has made it an increasingly important contributor to NATO’s evolving approach to security on its southern flank.

Beyond conventional threats

The discussions also reflected a broader shift in how NATO defines security itself.

Traditional military threats remain central, particularly following the Russia-Ukraine military escalation. But experts argued that hybrid warfare, cyber attacks, disruption of global supply chains and maritime chokepoints are becoming equally important.

Caner cited Iran’s ability to threaten shipping through the Strait of Hormuz as an example of asymmetric pressure that extends far beyond conventional military confrontation.

“This is not conventional warfare in the sense that we know,” he said. “That’s why NATO has to update itself based on these newly emerging threats.”

Akilli extended that argument further, suggesting the Alliance itself is entering a new phase. “NATO has been built on collective security,” he said. “But it must be transformed into collective resilience.”