GAGAUZIA, MOLDOVA, THE THREE SEAS INITIATIVE AND NEW FRONTS OF INSTABILITY IN THE BLACK SEA

The Black Sea, Adriatic and Baltic Seas have historically been both a geopolitical bridge between Asia and Europe and a geopolitical buffer separating Asia and Europe. These three seas were used by maritime European powers, primarily England, to surround Tsarist Russia and its spheres of influence, which grew and strengthened after the 18th century. They are still used with the same vision. NATO’s expansion in 2004 simultaneously in the Black Sea via Romania and Bulgaria; in the Adriatic via Slovenia and in the Baltic via the 3 Baltic Republics should also be seen within this framework. While the Black Sea was the only area for Türkiye that was not surrounded by the collective West until 2004, this situation has changed today. The Black Sea, which historically formed the logistic line of the War of Independence thanks to the 300 thousand tons of weapons and ammunition transferred via Russia, provided strength to the national army throughout the war and made it possible for Türkiye to stay out of World War II thanks to the Montreux Convention signed in 1936. The Black Sea has been an element of peace and balance thanks to Ankara’s balanced policies throughout the Cold War. Today, this healthy situation no longer exists.

GEOPOLITICAL VISION                                                                                                       

When the Cold War ended with the US victory, the neocon elites took action under the irresistible attraction that controlling Central and Eastern Europe would pave the way for controlling the heartland of Eurasia and therefore the world. After Gorbachev, who surrendered the Soviets to the West without firing a shot, Yeltsin’s coming to power made their job much easier. During the same period, separatism in some regions within Russia reached its peak thanks to US and British intelligence. These movements ended with Putin’s rule after 2000. In the conjuncture where even Yeltsin’s second-term presidential election propaganda was managed by an American company, Russia developed its relations with NATO after 1991. In 1991, Russia joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council and in 1994 it was included in the “Partnership for Peace” program. It was during this period that NATO took part in the Yavoriv base in western Ukraine under the Partnership for Peace (PfP) initiative. Thus, the US had its first NATO center on Ukraine and after the Orange Revolution in 2004, the Black Sea became the focus of the US and NATO’s expansion strategy. This base would later become the center of Ukraine’s preparations for war with Russia. With the NATO-Russia Founding Act signed in 1997, the NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council was established and relations were institutionalized. In the meantime, the US launched the Sea Breeze naval exercises with Ukraine via NATO in the same year. This multinational exercise was ostensibly carried out within the framework of NATO’s “Partnership for Peace” program. Although the aim of the exercise was to increase maritime security in the Black Sea, strengthen cooperation and improve interoperability among participating countries, its real purpose was to develop and institutionalize the working environment of US USEUCOM (U.S. European Forces) and USNAVEUR (U.S. Naval Forces European) personnel in the country. The last of these exercises, which are held every year, took place in 2021. Six months after this exercise, in which approximately 5,000 personnel from 32 countries, more than 30 ships and 40 aircraft took part, Russia intervened in Ukraine. In short, the United States chose Ukraine as its main proxy state to expand its sphere of influence in the Black Sea.

USEFUL PROXY UKRAINE

The historical and sociological structure of this country, which is adjacent to Russia, offered extraordinary opportunities to be a Trojan horse. The west of the country had collaborated with the Nazis in World War II. Similarly, the west of Ukraine was Catholic, unlike the orthodox east. Thanks to the 2004 and 2014 Orange revolutions, Western Ukraine gained political advantage over the east. Russia intervened in Crimea in 2014 and told the US to stop. However, the US did not stop. In 2022, the Russia-Ukraine war began and in the 3 years that passed, Ukraine was defeated in every field. Hundreds of thousands of young Ukrainians died. Russia annexed not only Crimea but also 4 separate regions (Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporozhye, Kherson) in Nova Russia, the center of natural resources and industrialization where the Russian population lived. They completely cut Ukraine off from the Sea of ​​Azov and its coast. Ukraine, which became a tool for the gamble of American neocons and British financial oligarchy, lost not only as a state but also with its people. Ukraine is shaping its post-war future by giving a blank check to the exploitation of its natural resources and infrastructure, in other words, accepting to be a colony, with the mining agreement it signed first with England (100-year partnership agreement) and then with the USA. However, considering what Russia has experienced during the 3-year war and especially the missile and air attacks on its homeland from Ukraine, it remains uncertain whether it will allow Kiev to rearm and have a foreign military presence on its territory.

HOSTILITY AGAINST EUROPE AND RUSSIA

Ukraine has now lost Trump's open military support. Apart from France, there is no country in Europe that will provide troops to the structure that will provide security guarantees in Ukraine. However, in an oxymoronic way, the EU and England are imposing that Ukraine continue the war and harm Russia under any circumstances. Although Russia does not have the military capabilities to protect it except the USA if its kinship community attacks Ukraine with great force, the EU and England continue this gamble. Let us remind you again. Geopolitical laws are above everything. The USA cannot stop the rising China while 3 wars are ongoing in both Russia and the Eastern Mediterranean basin. Today, the USA's power is sufficient on a single front. Even that is not complete. Russia has defeated Ukraine, which is supported with full capacity by the USA, the EU and the 32-member NATO. On the other hand, while the US’s aim is to defeat China, the main goal for the EU and England is to keep Russia, which is growing stronger in continental Europe, in balance and weaken it. This has been the golden rule since the 18th century. The dominant powers in Europe do not want new rivals. The reason for the outbreak of World War I was to push the rising Germany back to the continent, that is, to the land. It was inevitable that the war was instigated by England. However, sometimes the calculations at home do not match the market. The extension of the war for 2 years due to the Turks caused England to transfer hegemony to the USA and Russia to the Soviet revolution.

IS THE NEW UKRAINE, MOLDOVA?

Today, while the US is in decline, the EU and England are weakening in every field, the Ukraine-Russia war is nearing its end. However, geopolitical laws do not allow Russia to grow right next to Europe as a state with the world's largest nuclear war power, very rich natural resources and the largest surface area. New crisis areas will definitely emerge. In the past, Georgia was the largest candidate with Ukraine. However, its geography does not allow Georgia to be a perfect proxy state like Ukraine. Because it does not share a border with a NATO country other than Türkiye. Ukraine shared a border with Romania and Poland, the two most loyal proxies of the US and the EU. It received unlimited military support. Georgia is not in the same position. There is a sea in between. Türkiye also knows the rules of establishing geopolitical relations with the Soviets and Russia very well. It is aware of the troubles that CIA agents such as Ruzi Nazar and FETÖ have caused Türkiye in the past. Then, new candidates are needed to wear down Russia and create a new crisis area. At this point, Moldova comes to the fore. Located between Romania and Ukraine, Moldova is a country of great geopolitical, security and strategic importance for both NATO and the European Union (EU). This country is also located within Russia’s western forward defense geopolitical axis. The Russian military presence in the Transnistria region and the Orthodox Turks’ Gagauzia region are the Achilles’ heels of Moldova’s fragmented structure. While the West’s hoped-for strategic outcome in the Ukrainian war has not been achieved today, Moldova is being positioned as a second anti-Russian buffer state. The new identity, religious structure and media order imposed by the West on Moldova are intended to transform this country into an outpost in Russia’s ring of encirclement. If this strategy is successful, Moldova could become the scene of the next proxy conflict. Gagauzia and Transnistria could become flashpoints of this conflict.

TRANSFORMED MOLDOVA

Moldova gained EU candidate status in 2022 and began membership negotiations in 2023. These steps strengthen Moldova’s integration with the West and limit Russia’s influence in the region. As the Ukraine-Russia war completes its third year, Moldova has consolidated its position as a potential transit country for alternative lines to the EU energy infrastructure. It has gained importance as a jumping-off point for Western intelligence and cybersecurity operations. It has emerged that it can be used as a testing ground for psychological operations conducted through media, religion, education and ethnicity, especially in “hybrid war” strategies in Eastern Europe. What has happened in recent months proves this. The first leg of the strategy carried out in Moldova can be defined as classic regime engineering moves aimed at the disintegration of identity structures. The restriction efforts, especially on the Russian education system, are read as an attempt to erase the historical and cultural memory of Moldovan society. At the same time, the pressures against the Moldovan Orthodox Church, which is supported by approximately 70% of the population, aim to weaken religious affiliation and bring a Western-centered parallel religious structure (the Metropolitanate of Bessarabia) to the forefront. This is the Moldovan version of the Kiev Church strategy, which was established to break the influence of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine and supported by the Fener Patriarchate. (By the way, let us remind you that we have difficulty understanding why Gagauz living in Istanbul go to the Fener Greek Orthodox Church instead of the Turkish Orthodox Church.) The closure of a total of 12 television channels in the 2022-2023 period and the declaration of independent or pro-Russian media outlets as unlicensed are a harsh move aimed at controlling the flow of information in Moldova from a single center. This model is directly similar to the media closure policies launched in Ukraine in 2021.

NATO AND MOLDOVA

On the other hand, more than 80% of Moldova’s “chernozem” agricultural lands, considered the most fertile land in Europe, have been transferred to farmers who were purchased by the international finance and investment group Blackrock. This situation alone signals that Moldova is rapidly becoming a colony of the West. The EU’s efforts to include Moldova within its borders are aimed at Moldova balancing Russian influence in the region. Article 11 of Moldova’s constitution guarantees the country’s permanent neutrality and prohibits the deployment of foreign military forces on its territory, but cooperation with NATO has continued since 1994 within the framework of the “Partnership for Peace” program. By signing a security and defense partnership agreement with the EU in 2024, it has also deepened cooperation in areas such as intelligence sharing and joint military exercises. In an EU or NATO member country, weapons systems or air elements that would strike Russia’s interior are unacceptable to Russian strategists. This situation is a potential subject for exploitation as Russia’s soft underbelly, especially for the EU and the UK. As long as pro-Western governments continue in Moldova as they are today, the flow of weapons and intelligence elements to Moldova will continue via Romania, NATO and the US’s most loyal proxy and ally in the Black Sea.

TRANSDINISTER AND GAGAUZIA

In the south of Moldova, there is the Gagauz (Gökoğuz) Autonomous Region, where Turks predominate; and in the east of the Dniester, there is the Transnistria (Prinistrovian Republic), where 200,000 Russian minorities live. Let us remind you that the Transnistria region is an independent state under the protection of the Russian Union with 1,500 soldiers, and is not recognized by any other state except Russia. On the other hand, on February 28, 2024, the Transnistria Congress decided to officially apply to Russia to request protection against Moldova's pressures. Although the Gagauz Region is physically small, its geopolitical importance in the Romania-Moldova-Ukraine triangle is high. Although the Gagauz are Orthodox Christians, they are a community of Turkish origin and speak Turkish. This situation presents an important opportunity for Türkiye to show the West that "Turkish identity exists outside of Islam." Gagauzia is Moldova's gateway to Ukraine and the Black Sea ports. It is a critical transit point for energy lines, agriculture and transit trade. Being a constitutionally autonomous region, rather than a separatist one like Transnistria, gives it a fragile but central role within the unitary structure of Moldova. The Gagauz Autonomous Region stood by Russia in the Ukraine War and openly requested support from Russia against a possible Moldovan intervention in the spring of 2024. On March 25, 2025, the President of the Gagauz Autonomous Region, Ms. Evghenia Guțul, was detained at Chişinău Airport on charges of receiving $3 million from Russia in the elections and committing fraud and sent to Moldova’s worst prison. The Gagauz leader was then sent to house arrest and awaits trial. Shortly after this incident, on April 14, 2025, the Constitutional Court of Moldova revoked the authority of the Gagauz People’s Assembly (PAG) to appoint the region’s chief prosecutor, triggering a new crisis. Ethnic and political sensitivities in Gagauzia have the potential to clash with the central government’s policies. Gagauzia, with its pro-Russian tendencies and Christian Orthodox identity, is a front that resists Moldova’s attempt to conform to Western lines. Pressures on this region could include demonizing the region by accusing it of separatism and then taking control of it through military or police means. This is reminiscent of the model that the Nazi-dominated Kiev regime implemented in Donbas after 2008. Türkiye, on the other hand, has remained silent about the developments in the autonomous region, despite having a consulate general in Comrat, the capital of Gagauzia, which it greatly supported establishing in 1994. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not issue a press statement in either incident. Russia, on the other hand, has responded to the developments in Gagauzia at the highest level of the state.

CRISIS POTENTIAL

Russia-Moldova relations, which have been tense since the end of the Cold War due to the Transnistria issue, have become even more tense with the events in Gagvusia. Moldova is making great efforts to both curry favor with NATO and to become an EU member. Considering Romania’s common Latin-based ethnic ties with Moldova and the existence of periods of political unity in the past (such as the decision to unite with Romania after 1918), it would not be surprising if Romania, the chief American vassal in the Black Sea, would initiate a new process to provoke Russia in the Transnistria region by taking its close relative Moldova with it. In such a case, in a conjuncture where the Ukrainian War does not end with a peace agreement, Russia’s inevitable intervention in Odessa may come to the agenda. By taking Odessa, Russia could cut off Ukraine’s access to the sea. In this case, Moldova and the Transnistria region could be drawn into conflict. In this case, a Russian corridor could be opened to Transnistria via Odessa. This would trigger a Russia-Moldova and therefore a Russia-Romania crisis. The greatest expectation of the US neocons, the military industry, the EU and the British financial oligarchs is for Russia and Moldova to enter an armed conflict. If Romania takes on the role of Poland and Moldova becomes Ukrainian, the pressure and provocations against Türkiye for anti-Russia will increase. On the other hand, the protection of the Moscow-supporting Gagauz Turks against Moldovan pressures will be an important test for Türkiye.

ROMANIA THE RATCHET

The two most effective elements of Romania being the most important battering ram of the US and NATO in the Black Sea are the SM 3 Ballistic Missile Defense systems at the Devesul Naval Base and the ‘Mihail Kogălniceanu’ Air Base, which will be the largest NATO base in Europe. There are SM 3 batteries of the US Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (ABM) System at the Devesul Naval Base in Romania. In 2019, the strategic American THAAD Air Defense Missile System was temporarily deployed to protect this base. This situation puts the Devesul base in the position of being the first target to be hit in a conventional or nuclear war. Let us remind you that this base should work in harmony with the Kürecik X-Band Radar base in Türkiye. Therefore, the Kürecik radar is also among the first targets to be hit. As we always emphasize, we have no authority over the use of either the Kürecik Air Radar or the B 61 tactical nuclear bombs located in Incirlik. However, the risk of a nuclear attack that we assume through these two military assets is indescribable. On the one hand, we are building the first nuclear power plant in our country with Russia. On the other hand, we keep American B-61 nuclear bombs in Incirlik to use against Russia. The Mihail Kogălniceanu air base, which currently hosts 5,000 soldiers including American and NATO soldiers, will replace the joint US/NATO air base in Ramstein, Germany. The expansion of the air base continues. Although NATO and US resources are used, Romania is allocating a significant share of its defense budget for this base, which will cost 3 billion dollars. The base, the first expansion of which will be completed in 2030, will be able to host 10,000 soldiers. The base, which will be fully operational in 2040, can be used as a pressure tool not only against Russia but also against Türkiye. Interestingly, Türkiye implemented Article 19 of the Montreux Convention, which includes active neutrality, in the Russian-Ukraine War and banned all warships from entering and exiting the Black Sea, while during the war, it took its place on the anti-Russian front by providing F-16 fighter jets to NATO air operations conducted from this base and violated neutrality in the air. Ankara, which has managed to remain neutral at sea, immediately sent aircraft to Romanians’ requests for air support. This must be geopolitical blindness. Let’s not forget that we are neighbors by sea in the Black Sea in terms of the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf delimitation. Let us remind you that both states have extracted natural gas resources in the Western Black Sea and that these fields are adjacent. The Montreux regime does not only regulate the transit regime through the Turkish Straits, but is also a security regime that maintains balance and stability in the Black Sea. We are the owners and implementers of this regime. Romania, as a Latin state between Slavs and Turks, acts as a ticking time bomb in the Black Sea under the proxy of the United States without any borders.

3 SEAS INITIATIVE

3 Seas Initiative. Last week, Türkiye announced that it was a strategic partner in the 3 Seas Initiative led by Poland. This decision, which was taken solely in line with logistical goals without considering the geopolitical goals of this initiative, should be approached with caution. Because the geopolitical goals of the 3 Seas Initiative include not only Russia, but also Türkiye, which will protect its own geopolitics against US and EU interests. This initiative, of which Greece is a full member, creates a transportation infrastructure that will provide great support to Greece when Turkish and Greek interests clash. Let us explain. The “Intermarium” or “Between the Seas” design proposed by Józef Piłsudski, the first president of Poland, which was re-established in 1918, envisioned a multinational community of states located on the Adriatic, Black Sea and Baltic Seas, forming a barrier against Soviet Russia. Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland, Belarus, Ukraine, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia were parts of this community. The aim was to serve the disintegration of the Russian Empire. However, the plans did not work. This process ended when Hitler Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939. Poland declared the Three Seas Initiative by President Andrzej Duda as of 2015. The initiative aims at the economic and infrastructural development of twelve countries located between the Baltic, Black and Adriatic Seas. First, a forum was established with 12 EU members (Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia) and later with Greece. Germany was not invited to the forum. Today, Poland is trying to develop a special alliance relationship with the USA directly against Russia, keeping Germany and the EU out. The aim is to establish an Eastern European front against Russia, bypassing Brussels, and to draw the USA directly into the region. The initiative is considered an important part of the operational capabilities of the Transatlantic structure, especially transportation infrastructure. The 3 Seas Initiative can be evaluated as a geopolitical move aimed at creating a US-controlled sphere of influence in Eastern Europe against Russia, by bypassing Brussels and excluding Berlin, under the leadership of Poland. It is being carried out as a new geopolitical project that will be directly involved and under the control of the US, which sees that the European Union is now heading towards an East-West division. This initiative by Poland is also an extremely useful tool for the new European security architecture to be developed under the leadership of the US. The 3 Seas Initiative established an Investment Fund to carry out infrastructure projects to modernize and integrate the roads, railways, ports, digital and energy infrastructures of Central and Eastern European countries, and the US has provided direct support of $300 million to this fund so far and has declared that it will continue to support it. Among the transportation infrastructure investments of the initiative. The most important corridor that will contribute to NATO's military mobility on the eastern flank is Via Carpatia. The total length is 718 km, 78 km of which is existing, 289 km under construction and 351 km in preparation. This axis connects the Klaipeda port in Lithuania to Thessaloniki in Greece via Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria. This and other transportation corridors are considered important for NATO to increase its deterrence along the north-south and other corridors along the eastern line. Internal movements in Moldova should be evaluated within the 3 Sea Initiative.

EVALUATION

Moldova may be small, militarily weak and economically fragile. However, it has become a “high leverage” country in geopolitical terms. Because it can be a direct extension of the Ukraine conflict. Moldova is the gateway to EU-NATO expansion. It is one of the last trenches for Russia’s sphere of influence in the Black Sea. Therefore, Moldova is no longer only a geopolitical laboratory where the question “will it be the new Ukraine?” is sought at the intersection of the calculations of the great powers, not only with its own problems. The future of Gagauzia may directly affect Türkiye’s specific weight within Western systems and its leadership within the Turkic World. Therefore, for Türkiye, Gagauzia is not only a diaspora interest, but also the first testing ground at the Western end of the strategic continuum. In this context, Türkiye’s concrete steps, foreign policy tools and crisis reflexes in Gagauzia are not only symbolic, but also candidates for geopolitical results. The question that needs to be asked is, is Türkiye defending only a minority in Gagauzia? Or is it defending its geopolitical presence in the Black Sea? Will it be revisionist or balancing in the eyes of the West? In the new geopolitical plane where Moldova is forced to follow the Western line and Gagauzia’s autonomous structure is under threat, Türkiye is being tested not only as a cultural protector but also as a regional power that manages perception, balances crises and conducts multi-actor diplomacy. In this equation: Türkiye has to walk a delicate line between military intervention and cultural soft power. A multi-vector pressure line may form where Romania and Russia may aim for the same goal (limiting Türkiye’s influence) with different justifications. To be effective in the Western system without being labeled as a revisionist will test Türkiye’s diplomatic intelligence and multi-channel strategy development capacity. Every crisis in Gagauzia will reshape Türkiye’s geopolitical reflexes on the southern front of the Black Sea. Ankara’s Gagauzia reflex is not just an ethnic solidarity; it is the will to hold on to the Black Sea. At the same time, it is a test of Türkiye’s ability to maintain its autonomous position within NATO. On the other hand, the US’s Broader Black Sea Region and Poland’s 3 Sea Region approach, Ukraine and Georgia policies are in a common geopolitical target and attitude. Türkiye, with great geopolitical blindness, is a strategic partner. The pressures and imbalances that the 3 Seas Initiative will indirectly create on the Black Sea and the regime provided by the Montreux Convention should be treated with the same sensitivity as the Second World War.