The beginning of the process of admitting Sweden and Finland to NATO caused great jubilation in European capitals.

Deep satisfaction is not hidden in Washington either, which muddied this story about the transformation of the "Union of Thirty" into a squad of "32 North Atlantic heroes" dressed in miracle armor of the 21st century and ready to face wall to wall with Russia.

NATO old-timers are ready to accept recruits as soon as possible, but it is physically impossible to issue membership cards to Helsinki and Stockholm right tomorrow.

After submitting an application, it is necessary to negotiate in the NATO Council, then sign a membership agreement, which will have to be ratified by 30 parliaments of the member countries of the alliance.

All this will take not weeks, but months.

Future NATO members are, of course, not heroes, but two specific Scandinavian beauties, ready to part with the innocence of neutrality that they have kept for many years in order to marry Brussels and be behind him like a stone wall.

And here it turns out that on the way to the Brussels wedding of Finland and Sweden, already sewing white wedding dresses, there is a serious obstacle or problem.

This problem has a name, a surname and a high position, and it is called "Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan."

The Turkish leader is categorically against the membership of Sweden and Finland in NATO and makes it clear that so far there can be no talk of approval of their admission to NATO by Ankara.

Why?

Erdogan has a long list of grievances both against two future NATO recruits who, in his words, have become a "guest house" for "Kurdish terrorists", and against other European countries that in 2019 imposed restrictions on the export of weapons after the start of a Turkish operation against Kurdish groups in Syria, and finally to the USA.

The previous White House administration excluded Turkey from the F-35 fighter program as a punishment for acquiring Russian S-400 systems.

And today, Turkey, which has the right to veto, is not exactly blackmailing the West, but is offering it to remove these irritants.

He proposes to agree: first, fulfill my requirements, and then we will talk about the membership of Sweden and Finland.

There are two pieces of news in this whole story - good and bad.

The bad news is that in the end, of course, Ankara will remove its objections and Sweden and Finland will join NATO.

There is no doubt about this.

President Erdogan has repeatedly used painful techniques in relations with allies.

Last October, he declared ten Western ambassadors persona non grata after they demanded that Ankara release Turkish human rights activist and government critic Osman Kavala, who has been in custody since 2017.

Having marked a red line in relations with the West, the Turkish leader then made it clear that he would not tolerate interference in the country's internal affairs.

As a result, the shocked ambassadors apologized and remained in Ankara.

The incident has ended.

So the same thing will happen with the Turkish demarche about Sweden and Finland.

The good news is that there is likely to be a heavy price to pay for Turkish agreement between the US and the West, including the lifting of sanctions on independent politics and defense cooperation with Russia.

The main conclusion: in the modern world, the winner is the one who follows not the herd instincts of alliances with their mythical collective will, but their own national interests.

It does not bend, holds the blow and stands firmly on its feet.

The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.