We were worse 2 years ago, due huge taxes we were able to get enough money in central bank. But due political decisions, we burned huge amount of money. Türkiye can sustain it's military projects even now.
We have no ambition to resurrect ottoman empire. We are just trying to be economical and military power in our region. Our region does not let weak to survive. There are many natural gas and petroleum in the Aegean and med. Sea. That is why every nation in our region invest more and more on weapon systems(see Egypt, Italy ,Israel, Cyprus, Greece, even France even though it is not med. Sea country,it invests more on med sea area )
NATO can not solve our problems in our region.
We also need to have nuclear weapons and our own nuclear power stations to sustain economic developments and to have a neutrealiying power against nuclear Israel ,İran and Russia.
I think the window for developing nuclear weapons is effectively closed. The only time when such a window existed was during the chaotic Cold War era, when countries like China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea had an opportunity to pursue nuclear development. However, with the advent of the Digital Age, every action is now meticulously monitored, and no country can conceal its intentions or activities. This goes beyond just surveillance of efforts; it includes the surveillance of intent as well. Every communication channel has been infiltrated, making it impossible to remain hidden from intelligence agencies.
While the United Nations Security Council may disagree on many issues, one area in which there is rare consensus is the prevention of additional nuclear-armed countries. Even China, despite having its own nuclear arsenal, would likely oppose the development of nuclear weapons in other countries, not to mention Russia, which shares a border with many nations and has a strong interest in regional stability. It’s not that owning nuclear weapons is inherently wrong, but some national elites are deluded into thinking they can recreate an empire like the Ottoman Empire without the necessary technological or intellectual resources to back it up. By constantly adopting an offensive stance and burning bridges with powers like the USA, China, and Russia, the prospects of receiving support for such a nuclear ambition become even slimmer. Had these nations aligned with Russia or China as subordinate allies, there might have been some chance of receiving protection or at least some diplomatic support against Western influence.
A savvy leader would always present their country as weak, focusing on the necessity of nuclear weapons solely for self-defense, particularly against perceived threats from Iran or Israel. However, before even considering nuclear weapons, a more urgent task should be the development of a robust domestic nuclear industry. Building such an industry takes decades to master, even if the country were to begin now. It requires an entire ecosystem, skilled manpower, and resources, unlike the development of military products that can sometimes be outsourced to companies like BAE or Leonardo for design and manufacturing. Nuclear technology, on the other hand, is tightly controlled and far more complex.
In fact, a strategic leader might even publicly denounce the idea of nuclear weapons, presenting a pacifist stance while secretly advancing the country’s expertise in nuclear power, which could be transferred over to weapons development at a later stage. Unlike military products, which can be outsourced to external contractors, nuclear weapons development requires a nation to have significant, homegrown expertise. By focusing on the peaceful use of nuclear power, a country can slowly build up the necessary technical capabilities and infrastructure to pursue nuclear weapons if and when the need arises. The process of building a civilian nuclear industry could be a cover for the eventual, more covert development of nuclear weapons, without publicly committing to such a program.