At first glance, it might seem like just another poll. But when 71% of Turks say their country should develop nuclear weapons, it’s more than a blip on the radar. It’s a flashing warning light — a sign that Turkey is undergoing a deep strategic recalibration. What we're seeing isn't just anxiety. It's a shift in national psyche, a growing consensus that nuclear power equals national power — and that the old rules of global security no longer serve Turkish interests.
This article takes a closer look at what’s driving this nuclear pivot: the geopolitical flashpoints, the fraying trust in alliances, and the popular sense that Turkey must chart its own path — even if that means breaking a decades-old taboo.
Aftershock from the Middle East: Iran, Israel, and Turkey's Wake-Up Call
In the spring of 2025, Israel launched a high-stakes strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. But the aftermath was not what many in Tel Aviv or Washington had anticipated. Not only did Tehran manage to repel parts of the attack, it hit back — and hard. Iranian ballistic missiles pierced Israel’s vaunted Iron Dome, damaging key infrastructure and sending a clear message: Iran had teeth, and they were sharp.
For Turkey, the lesson was sobering. Despite spending more than $20.4 billion on defense in 2024 (according to SIPRI), and building one of the region’s most capable militaries, nearly half the Turkish public still doubts the country could withstand a full-scale missile barrage.
That perception of vulnerability, especially in a region where nuclear weapons are no longer the exception, is feeding a new kind of security thinking. The fact that Israel, India, Pakistan — and soon, possibly Iran — all have nukes is reshaping how Turks see the balance of power. In that new calculus, being non-nuclear equals being exposed.
NATO No Longer Sacred: Cracks in the Alliance
According to a recent Research Istanbul poll, 72% of Turks don’t believe NATO would come to their aid in the event of an attack. That’s not just skepticism. It’s a rupture — the crumbling of decades-old faith in the transatlantic alliance.
The reasons are not hard to trace. There’s long-simmering anger over U.S. support for Kurdish militias in Syria (specifically the YPG, which Ankara classifies as a terrorist group). There’s the F-35 debacle, when Washington blocked sales after Turkey bought Russian S-400 missile systems. There’s the growing perception that NATO favors Greece in territorial disputes. And there’s a sense that the alliance has done little to help Turkey shoulder the burden of Middle Eastern migration.
In theory, Turkey is NATO’s second-largest military force. In practice, its strategic priorities have been drifting away from Brussels and Washington for years. The trust deficit is now wide enough to be measured in megatons.
Nukes as Equalizers: The Rise of the Atomic Consensus
What’s remarkable — and troubling to many in the West — is how broad the support for a Turkish nuclear program has become. This isn’t just a right-wing or nationalist impulse. It's crossing ideological lines:
- 65% of secular party supporters say yes to nukes
- 83% of nationalists
- 76% of conservatives and Islamists
- 69% of Turks under 30
The message is clear: this isn't just about deterrence — it's about dignity. If others can have the bomb, why not Turkey?
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan tapped into this sentiment as far back as 2019, when he declared:
"Some countries have nuclear weapons, but they tell us we can’t have them. I do not accept this."
That line, dismissed at the time as rhetorical posturing, now rings with the weight of foresight — especially amid escalating tensions with the West.
The NPT and the “Nuclear Apartheid” Argument
Turkey has been a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) since 1980, having ratified it in 1969. Under the treaty, countries without nuclear weapons as of 1967 agreed not to pursue them, in exchange for peaceful nuclear tech and security guarantees.
But critics — in Turkey and beyond — argue that the NPT has become a club of double standards. The term “nuclear apartheid” is gaining traction, especially among those who point out the inconsistencies:
- Israel never signed the NPT, yet faces no penalties and remains a de facto nuclear state.
- India and Pakistan conducted nuclear tests in 1998 — and still ended up on Washington’s list of strategic partners.
- U.S. tactical nukes, including B61 bombs, remain stationed at Turkey’s own Incirlik Air Base, but Ankara is barred from having its own.
The hypocrisy is hard to miss. Why should Turkey keep playing by rules that seem custom-written for others?
One Turkish lawmaker from the nationalist MHP party recently put it bluntly:
"Turkey doesn’t have to remain a hostage to treaties written by yesterday’s victors. We have the right to defend our sovereignty however our people see fit."
What began as an elite debate is now a national conversation. The idea of a Turkish bomb — once unthinkable — is edging into the mainstream. This is about more than missiles or deterrence. It’s about the feeling that Turkey has outgrown its Cold War leash and is ready to renegotiate its place in the global order.
If the West wants to head this off, the answer won’t lie in threats or moral appeals. It will require rethinking the very foundations of the nonproliferation regime — and addressing the core grievances of rising powers who no longer see fairness in a nuclear world designed for someone else’s past.
Officially, Turkey isn’t pursuing nuclear weapons. But scratch the surface of the country's expanding atomic energy program, and the line between civilian and military use begins to blur. At the heart of this debate is the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant — a $20 billion project that’s the largest of its kind in the Middle East. Built in partnership with Russia’s state-owned Rosatom, the plant is slated to be operated entirely by a Russian team. Yet for all the talk of civilian energy, Akkuyu is laying down more than just power lines. It’s building the human capital, infrastructure, and legal framework that — under the right political conditions — could serve as the foundation for a domestic weapons program.
And Akkuyu is just the beginning.
Turkey plans to build two more nuclear plants: one in Sinop on the Black Sea, the other in Thrace. These next phases will involve partners from Japan, South Korea, and China. Each new facility adds more centrifuges, more enriched uranium, more engineers — and more dual-use potential. As one retired Turkish general told Hurriyet,
"You don’t need warheads. If you’ve got the materials, the people, and the tech, the only missing ingredient is a political decision."
Learning from the Nuclear Playbook: Global Precedents and Strategic Parallels
Turkey wouldn’t be the first country to blur the lines between peaceful and military atomic ambitions:
- Israel has never officially acknowledged its nuclear arsenal, but SIPRI estimates it holds up to 90 warheads.
- India and Pakistan developed civilian programs that quietly ran parallel to their military efforts.
- Iran has insisted its nuclear work is peaceful — but its so-called "breakout capability" remains a source of international tension.
Should Ankara opt for the nuclear path, its justification is ready-made:
- It’s surrounded by unstable regimes and nuclear neighbors — Israel, Iran, Russia, and Pakistan.
- NATO is increasingly seen as unreliable.
- And perhaps most importantly: sovereign nations have the right to protect themselves on their own terms.
Could Turkey Go Nuclear?
The Belfer Center at Harvard University estimates that, if Ankara gives the green light, it could develop a nuclear weapon prototype in 3 to 7 years. The timeline depends on several variables:
- Domestic capacity for uranium enrichment
- The feasibility of covert or parallel military development
- Whether global powers back off — or at least look the other way
- Political unity and public support at home
The biggest hurdle? Sanctions. Any move toward weaponization would trigger swift retaliation from the U.S., the EU, and the IAEA. But Turkey has already shown it can weather sanctions — just look at its defiance over the Russian S-400 missile system and its ejection from the F-35 fighter program.
Grassroots Momentum: The Bottom-Up Push for a Turkish Bomb
What makes Turkey’s nuclear conversation unique is that it’s not being driven solely from the top. This isn’t a presidential passion project or a deep-state scheme. It’s a demand rising from the ground up — fueled by national anxiety, regional instability, and media framing.
Within the ruling AKP–MHP coalition, nuclear talk is growing bolder. In June 2025, an MHP lawmaker told parliament:
"We live in an era where international law doesn’t work. The only thing that truly deters aggression is nuclear capability. We need to talk about this — out loud."
Even Turkey’s main opposition, the secular CHP, hasn’t drawn a firm line against nuclear weapons. Analysts say that even among center-left intellectuals, there’s growing recognition that the old models of national security may no longer apply. In July 2025, the traditionally anti-government broadcaster Halk TV aired a primetime panel titled: “Is Nuclear Deterrence the Only Way to Protect Turkey?”
Mainstream media outlets like Yeni Şafak, Sabah, Milliyet, and Türkiye are increasingly echoing the same talking points:
- Turkey can no longer depend on foreign guarantees.
- Nuclear weapons are an “insurance policy” against the collapse of global order.
- A Turkish bomb could form the backbone of a new doctrine of strategic autonomy — bağımsız savunma doktrini.
Global Fallout: What Happens If Turkey Goes Nuclear?
If Ankara formally declares its intent to develop nuclear weapons, it would be the most serious challenge to the global nonproliferation regime since North Korea — and potentially more consequential, given Turkey’s geography and alliances.
Washington is unlikely to sit back. But America’s leverage over Turkey is shrinking:
- Turkey remains out of the F-35 program.
- Key U.S. exports for defense systems are restricted.
- Congress continues to slam Ankara for its ties with Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran.
- The Kurdish issue remains a long-standing sore point.
The European Union might talk sanctions, but Brussels has little bite left. Past efforts to pressure Turkey over migration and gas exploration have largely failed — especially with Germany, Italy, and Spain relying on Turkish trade and transit routes.
Russia would publicly voice concern, but confrontation is unlikely. With multi-billion-dollar projects like Akkuyu and the TurkStream pipeline in play, Moscow has no appetite for burning bridges. In fact, a nuclear-armed Turkey could serve as a useful counterweight to U.S. influence — a wildcard Russia might quietly welcome.
China would likely watch and wait, weighing how a Turkish bomb could affect the regional nuclear balance and tech proliferation in Central Asia.
Iran, on the other hand, would see it as a direct provocation. The two nations already clash over Iraq, Syria, the South Caucasus, and Zangezur. If Turkey exits the NPT and launches a nuclear sprint, Iran may feel compelled to do the same — and the Middle East could plunge into a nuclear shadow zone with no clear rules and no clear lines.
Turkey’s nuclear conversation is no longer theoretical. It’s political. It’s strategic. And it’s unfolding in real time, against the backdrop of a collapsing global security order. The world may not be ready for a nuclear Turkey — but Turkey, increasingly, seems ready for that world.
What Happens If Turkey Goes Nuclear? Deterrence or Disaster in the Making
For Turkey’s strategic thinkers, the case for developing nuclear weapons is no longer theoretical — it’s existential. Behind the headlines, the arguments echo Cold War logic: the principle of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), which once kept the U.S. and Soviet Union from crossing the line, is now being repurposed for the post-American Middle East.
From their perspective, the benefits are clear:
- A nuclear Turkey becomes untouchable — immune to direct aggression.
- Regional rivals like Greece, Israel, Iran, and even Russia would think twice before acting provocatively.
- NATO could no longer leverage security as a bargaining chip.
- Turkey would gain global prestige, finally earning a place at the table with the original nuclear powers — the so-called P5.
But the flipside of that deterrence logic is deeply unstable:
- Arab monarchies — Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt — may feel pressured to match Turkey’s capability, launching their own nuclear quests.
- The risk of nuclear tech leaking to radical non-state actors goes up.
- The already volatile regions of the South Caucasus, the Balkans, and the Eastern Mediterranean could become nuclear flashpoints.
A Crossroads with No Easy Exit
Turkey today stands at a historic inflection point. There’s no official policy shift — yet. No announcement, no breakout. But the people have spoken. That 71% public approval for a national nuclear program is more than a data point. It’s a signal. A warning flare. A collective rebuke of the post-WWII global security order, now viewed in Ankara as increasingly outdated and unjust.
The fear is real. The resentment is real. And so is the desire to take control of national destiny without relying on alliances that many Turks now see as hollow promises.
Pakistan once built its bomb under the banner of "an Islamic force to deter India." Today, a similar slogan could emerge in Ankara — "a national nuclear shield, forged not by treaty but by the will of the people."
This may no longer be a question of if.
It’s a question of when.
And that moment, by all indications, is drawing closer by the day.