Against the backdrop of an extremely laudatory article in “Newsweek” about Erdogan and his rising friendship with Trump, which elevated Turkey to the level of a geopolitical player with a role in resolving global conflicts, analyses in the Turkish press about Ankara's decision to make Turkey a “strategic partner” of the “Three Seas Initiative” somehow remain on the periphery.
Not that ordinary Bulgarians in our country realize what this project actually is, but Turkey's ambition not to stay away from it is at least a curious topic for the processes taking place along the East-West line.
The fact is that this Initiative was created more than 10 years ago and affects the countries of Central and Eastern Europe between Baltic-Black Sea-Adriatic.
The countries of Central and Eastern Europe, i.e. Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, together with Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, cover 1/3 of the EU territory and have a population of 111 million people. Some have coasts on the Baltic Sea, Bulgaria and Romania on the Black Sea, Croatia and Slovenia on the Adriatic, and Austria, Hungary and Slovakia have no sea coasts.
However, it is believed that all these countries are the “most limited in geopolitical terms”, almost the most backward in economic terms and have difficulty solving the problems of income inequality with Western Europe.
It is estimated that GDP per capita is 78% of the EU average. Given the fact that the countries of Western Europe, at least until recently, are well connected to each other by roads, railway lines, power lines, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe have serious shortcomings in this regard. Nearly 1.15 trillion euros are needed to overcome the problems in this regard. And it is doubtful at this stage that the Western countries in the EU will allocate funds in such a direction.
It is normal to harbor dissatisfaction in this regard, because the hopes were that the Western partners would help. In Washington, this state of affairs cannot be ignored and the decision is to find a way to benefit the United States by attracting Central and Eastern Europe to an “independent of Western Europe” initiative. The topic was discussed even during Obama's time, and the ”Atlantic Council” issued a report “Completing Europe from North to South with the Help of Energy, Transport and Telecommunications”. Immediately, discussions began in Poland and Croatia to prepare the ground for the “Three-Party Initiative” seas”.
In practice, however, it cannot be hidden that the unification of Central and Eastern Europe has been a British project since 1918, when it was announced in Poland. London encourages Warsaw to initiate a project “Between the Seas”, and the goal is “to dismember and weaken Russia” i.e. to make it harmless. As the saying goes “any resemblance to real people is coincidental”. In the case of today. After World War II, Central and Eastern Europe was left under the umbrella of the USSR, but today the initiative has the support of a galaxy of American presidents from Obama, Trump, to Biden. They say that Western Europe was skeptical because this is not a European project, but after 2016 it was recognized as a “project for the development of transatlantic relations”. Especially in Germany.
And here the question arises, what is Turkey doing in this Three Seas Initiative. ”Associated Participant” or ”Participating Member”? Or perhaps a ”Strategic Partner” as a country that can provide financial support or just prestige? Something like coaxing Ankara to participate in the pan-European security system that Ursula von der Leyen is initiating to militarily counter Russia? Some do not hide their concerns that this ”Three Seas Initiative” project could actually undermine the EU and even be ”a Trojan horse for the US in Europe”. After all, in his first term, President Trump attended the second meeting in Warsaw of the participants in this project. Ukraine was accepted as an ”Associated Member”.
In 2023, Greece is already a “participating member” and this at a time when it was declared a strategic partner by Washington as a result of the deepening of military cooperation with the US. New US military bases have been opened on Greek territory. Moldova receives ”associate membership”. In 2024, Japan is already a ”strategic partner” of the Initiative, and Ankara and Madrid have submitted applications to become ”strategic partners”. In April 2025, they have already become ”strategic partners” of the ”Three Seas Initiative”. Apparently because Erdogan has definitely directed Turkey's policies in a western direction, and the project itself is Anglo-American. How much this ”strategic partnership” will cost is another question. Because it is about investments. But it is undoubtedly geopolitical positioning.
With Greece in this initiative, the seas become 4, and the idea is to implement a project to connect Central Asia and Turkey, as well as to connect Iraq and Turkey through a “Development Road”.
This is how Eastern Europe is connected to Central Asia and the Middle East, and Turkey lives with the thought that it will be a “geopolitical center”. Especially knowing that trade by measure is preferable due to lower prices and short delivery times. As they say, “sea routes are the highways of foreign trade”. And those who control them reap dividends. And not just create them.
Whatever is said, the benefits or losses of participating in this project are yet to be calculated.
Does this participation meet national interests and orientation in a geopolitical aspect? Will there be a trap for a country like Turkey due to the low economic return of this “strategic partnership”? Published data show that Eastern European countries have presented 143 projects under the “Three Seas” initiative to investors. Of these, 89 projects have been declared “priority” and a budget of 102 billion euros has been indicated for them. Of these projects, 43 are investments in transport, 33 in energy and 13 in communications. There are suspicions that investments in transport projects are aimed at “infrastructure for military supplies”.
But among these 89 “priority projects” a gas pipeline from a Romanian gas field in the Black Sea to Bulgaria-Hungary-Austria is planned.
Also the Baltic-Adriatic trans-European transport network, including roads, railways, sea and air. The integration of the Baltic countries into the European railway network is already underway, and other projects are forthcoming. Turkey, they say, may participate as a subcontractor. Mostly in the “non-priority projects”, which are planned for implementation in Moldova or Ukraine. European investors are fleeing from these projects due to risks and difficulties associated with the war in Ukraine. They are military supply lines and undoubtedly threaten Russia.
If Turkey gets involved, it will further complicate relations with Moscow, and therefore calls are made for additional analyses of benefits and harms.
Turkish investments are not a priority for Europe, but if they "keep Russia busy", that is useful, right? Ankara may earn 1-2 billion dollars, but will this compensate for the damage from worsening relations with Moscow? The risk is undeniable, both economic and political. Even if we take into account the fact that Western sanctions against Russia deprived Eastern Europe of Russian oil and gas, and Turkey remained one of the few suppliers of Russian gas. The liquefied gas terminal built in Poland and Croatia as part of the "Three Seas" initiative only led to the replacement of Russian gas with liquefied American gas, but did not solve the problems with prices and supplies. And it reduced the dividends for Ankara.
It is clear that the calculations of the alleged risks of the “Three Seas Initiative” must be made soberly.
The 718 km “Via Carpathia” highway is planned, which will connect the Lithuanian port of Klaipeda with Thessaloniki through Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria, which will be completed by the end of 2025, and is a major project. This is “deterrent defense infrastructure against Russia”. Washington claims that in the event of a Russian invasion of the Baltic coast, the logistical transport of the war between NATO and Russia will be carried out through the Aegean Sea and the railways connected to Thessaloniki. lines and highways.
But some in Turkey worry that if NATO or the US decide to go to war with China, or Greece goes to war with Turkey, this “Via Carpathia” highway and the railway line to Thessaloniki could be used against Ankara, not against Moscow.
A kind of US plan to provide logistical support for the war in the Eastern Mediterranean through the Baltic Sea and Eastern Europe, where the Turkish fleet has no connection. It is concluded that the West is making Turkey dig its own well. A kind of “Three Seas Initiative”, which the Turkish authorities consider to be economically advantageous, is not enough to understand that the land and rail routes from the Baltic to the Aegean Sea are “a main line for military supplies that can also be used against Turkey”.
Why are these questions being raised in Ankara at this very stage? Because the anxiety about military action, a consequence of the war in Ukraine, does not disappear. On the contrary, the rattling of weapons is not just noise in the system, but also real actions in the direction of “care for security and defense” given the “aggressive intentions of Russia”. Brussels' activity in this direction is unstoppable. And what Sofia thinks about the matter is a fog for ordinary Bulgarians. Despite the participation of our Minister of Defense in the Forum for Security in the Black Sea and the Balkans.
The Deputy Minister of Defense of Turkey, Suay Alpay, stated at this forum that “The Battle for the Black Sea is not over. There are current and possible new threats”, because the region is “a strategic sea corridor connecting Europe, Asia, the Caspian Sea, the Middle East and the Mediterranean”. It is clear why Ankara's foreign policy is primarily directed towards these regions. It is not clear for Sofia. But perhaps Europe should realize how many and where the most Turks live. According to Turkish sources: in Germany there are 4 million, in France -700 thousand, in the Netherlands there are 500 thousand, in England -400 thousand, in the USA -300 thousand, in Austria -250 thousand, in Belgium -240 thousand, etc. They call it “soft power” or the opportunity for a role and influence. Let Europe think about it, and we are Europeans, right?