Furthermore, since Iran is not ‘Arab,’ it does not hinder the potential for a future Arab (League of Arab States) TT, unlike the Syria/Egypt/etc.
I do not think that a Arab League would come mostly because unlike other alliances such as lets say LATAM, the Arabs fight among themselves a lot of the time and they are not small border conflicts either. Do not forget that the Arab Nationalist and the Salafist/Wahhabist Fundamentalist Monarchists were at odds with each other for significant portions of the Cold war era, particularly in Yemen. Also some Arab Nations side with the Iranians over their fellow Arabs due to various factors (mainly Religion and Ideology). Point is making a TT based on cultural and economic multinational orgs is incredibly stupid to begin with and they are not popular among the fanbase with LATAM being the major exception.
Speaking of Arab nations, the Arab Nationalists, where ever it’s of the Nasserite or Ba’athist variety, they do have some connections to Korea in terms of weapon procurements. Mostly from the DPRK, Syria in particular used a lot of North Korean weaponry and even some North Korean airmen served in the Syrian Airforce during the 1970’s. Egypt’s a similar case though not to the same extent as Syria. The current Egyptian Military Junta not only brought K9’s but also A: brought a license to build them and considering obtaining Korean vehicles such as the K2 & FA-50.
Am I trying to say that Egypt and/or Syria should be a subtree of Korea? No, All I’m saying that they have a connection to Korea in some way. And that’s not including other Arab nations.
The UAE would be an interesting choice and I’m not totally against it but not fully sold on it either. The Main Issue with the UAE (and every other Gulf Arab States except Oman) don’t have perfect fits to be subtree in any of the existing TT’s and trying to make a separate Gulf Arab TT even in an postwar TT is proving to be very tricky. I ruled out Oman since they can very easily be a subtree of the British TT due to their extremely close relationship with the UK. Either way a UAE subtree in the Korean TT is far from the worst idea out there.
Another potential addition is Myanmar for a lot of the same reasons as Vietnam but also suffering from a lot of the same drawbacks.
In the case of Türkiye , given not only the relatively recent K9, K2, and KT-1 but also the long-standing technical and military cooperation, it wouldn’t be strange. However, I believe it is not impossible for Türkiye to have a standalone tree.
If Turkiye becomes a subtree of Korea there’s also a chance that Azerbaijan would be added alongside the Turkish subtree as well even if their ties to either Korea is rather weak other than occasionally buying some South Korean weapons, mainly ATGMS. Personally Azerbaijan is a better fit as a Israeli subtree since they have stronger ties with them than with the Koreas and just as strong ties with even Turkiye. Knowing Gaijin they would do that anyways since their subtree selection is just getting worse.
Personally, I do not agree with the concept of sub-trees itself.
Aside from some very specific exceptions I agree with this sentiment especially since it’s becoming increasingly apparent that it’s an excuse to fill in gaps the laziest, sloppiest way possible. Even for the very few cases where i do agree with the subtree choice, I’m not impressed by the implementation of them.
