[A-List] Turkey: military eager for war?

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

Again, it would be good to get some kind of critical feedback from those who
know whether or not this analysis is correct. Sabri, Mine? Your comrades
need you.

-----

Reluctant Turkey edges towards US camp
By K Gajendra Singh
Asia Times, January 16 2003

Since coming into power in the November elections in Turkey last year, the
pro-Islamic and inexperienced government of the Justice and Development
Party (AKP) has been under unrelenting United States pressure to commit
Turkey to its war plans on Iraq to bring about a regime change in Baghdad.

But nearly 80 percent of Turks are opposed to a war on a Muslim country,
especially without any apparent justification or without United Nations
approval. With the unhappy experiences of the 1990-91 Gulf crisis and war,
which left deep social and economic scars on Turkey's polity and economy,
the Turkish leadership remains most reluctant to whole-heartedly join the
US.

Seduced by none-too-subtle US hints of getting back "lost" Kurdish areas in
north Iraq, which had been included in the map of the republic salvaged by
Kemal Ataturk from the ruins of the Ottoman empire after World War I, then
Turkish president Turgut Ozal became an energetic supporter of the coalition
forces of George Bush senior against Iraq in 1990-91.

Indeed, he almost opened another front in the war, but was stopped from
doing so by stiff opposition from his powerful military. But in the
aftermath of the 1991 war, instead of receiving oil-rich Mosul and Kirkuk,
economic sanctions against Iraq and closure of the Iraqi pipeline via Turkey
cost Ankara at least an estimated US$50 billion in lost trade and revenue
opportunities.

There has also been an upsurge in unemployment as the sanctions have halted
the thousands of trucks that used to ply daily between Turkey and Iraq,
aggravating the economic and social problems in southeast Turkey, the
heartland of the Kurdish rebellion for autonomy or independence from Turkey.

With the recent commutation to life imprisonment of a death sentence passed
on Kurdish rebel leader Abdullah Ocalan, and the relaxation of a ban on the
use of the Kurdish language, Turkey has gone some way to at least calming
the Kurdish problem. An Ocalan-led PKK (Kurdish Workers Party) rebellion has
cost Turkey over 35,000 lives, including 5,000 soldiers, since 1984. It has
also cost the state coffers $6 billion to $8 billion a year and tied up a
third of the Turkish army in the southeast of the country. Thousands of
Kurdish villages have been destroyed or relocated and millions of Kurds have
been moved out or have migrated, shattering the economy of the region.

And now the region faces the imminent prospect of war in Iraq, with Turkey,
which shares a long border with that country, particularly fearful of the
impact of an autonomous or, even worse, of an independent Kurdish region in
the northern part of Iraq.

And given past history, Ankara cannot be too sure that the US will look
after its interests in relation to this. As a deputy prime minister once
ruefully confided to this writer, "Mr Ambassador, you cannot trust the
Americans, not even their written promises." This remains true even now for
those who support the US, be it willingly or unwillingly.

Outgoing Turkish Premier Bulent Ecevit, leader of the Democratic Left Party,
along with his coalition partners had expressed a strong preference for a
peaceful solution to the Iraqi problem. Ecevit favored a foreign policy of
looking to the east, and underlined that Turkey had to live with its
neighbors.

Historically, Iraq has been very friendly compared to Syria, Iran and
Greece, with whom Turkey's relations have been acrimonious and full of
tension. But the Ecevit government, through a financial lifeline supplied by
US-controlled international organizations such as the International Monetary
Fund, was beholden to Washington and he could not openly oppose US plans.

Turkey's economic dependence on the US is still a very important factor.
Thus, the pro-Islamic and conservative AKP government, which has an
unprecedented two-thirds majority in the legislature after winning 34
percent of the votes cast, and which wants to consolidate and further expand
its base in the conservative Muslim electorate, has been put in an
unenviable position.

AKP leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan was accorded red carpet treatment in
Washington and the White House during his December visit, where earlier
Islamist and pro-Islamic parties and leaders would have been shunned. But he
was also "briefed" by US President George W Bush and later by US Secretary
of State Colin Powell, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and other
Pentagon officials.

The AKP and Erdogan, who have all along been for a peaceful solution to the
US-Iraq problem, said, "We would prefer the problem were solved through
peaceful means, but I now see that war is growing more probable than ever."
Making virtue of necessity, Erdogan then tried for compensation, reminding
the US that Ankara had lost billions of dollars since 1991's Gulf War.

He argued that the precarious state of Turkey's economy would be shattered
and prospective losses would amount to billions if the US attacked Iraq,
including the tourism sector, which generates $12 billion a year. Its border
trade in the south with Iraq would die. To Erdogan's shock, the US offered a
few billion only. Erdogan, keen to maintain US and Western support for his
pro-Islamic party and Turkey, talked of democracy in his country, but the US
has not budged in its demand for support in its war on Iraq. There is as yet
no agreement on Turkey's part or the nature of its commitment and terms of
participation with the US. Officially, the final word now rests with the
Turkish parliament.

Turkey's Prime Minister Abdullah Gul said this week that his government and
the armed forces "very much wish to avoid a war" in Iraq, but were weighing
a request by the Bush administration to deploy thousands of US troops
through Turkey to create a northern front against Saddam Hussein.

"We strongly value relations with our American friends," Gul said in an
interview after returning from a five-country Middle East diplomatic mission
that had been interpreted as an affirmation of Turkey's antiwar stance. Gul
emphasized that the military and civilian leaderships were working together
to come to a decision.

The Bush administration has been increasing pressure on Turkey, which is a
key ally and NATO's sole Muslim member, to open its ports and bases for use
in a possible war against Iraq. The US also has asked Turkey to allow the
deployment of tens of thousands of US troops who would transit Turkish
territory into Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, where they would open a
second front against Saddam's forces. On Monday, 150 US military inspectors
arrived in Turkey to begin examining 10 air bases and two ports for possible
use by American forces.

The Turks point out that US troops billeted at Saudi bases in 1990 are still
there. Many Turks fear that US troops, once they come, would stay on in the
region. And Turkey clearly wants to protect its interests in northern Iraq.
Ankara considers it indispensable for Turkey's national and political
interests that following any operation, control of the region will be under
the Turkish armed forces rather than any foreign military power.

This is not to the Pentagon's liking, as was bluntly put across by US Deputy
Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, who was recently in Ankara. The US wants
Turkey to fight along with the Kurdish peshmerga (guerrillas) in northern
Iraq, which is not acceptable to Turks. Instead, Turkey wants to play the
role of referee and parent in the region, and Turkey's degree of involvement
would determine the strength of the country's hand in Iraq's post-Saddam
future.

Since the formation of the AKP government in November last, there has been a
flurry of US visitors; senior officials from the Pentagon, Commerce and
State departments and generals. Visitors such as Under Secretary of State
Marc Grossman and US ambassador Robert Pearson in Ankara have told the
Turkish economic elite where their interests lie, and the need of US
goodwill for their economic survival. General Richard Myers, chairman of the
US Joint Chiefs of Staff, was the latest visitor. Barely a week goes by
without a trip to the Turkish capital by a high-ranking US official or
general.

At the same time, after a whirlwind tour of a dozen European capitals and
Washington, before the European Union (EU) summit in Copenhagen, both to
ease the anxiety of Western leaders about his new pro-Islamic party and to
canvass support for fixing a date for discussions for Turkey's entry into
EU, Erdogan has turned his attention to the east. He has visited the Turkic
republics in Central Asia and Moscow for discussions with Russian President
Vladimir Putin and others. Economic exchanges will increase, and each side
will be sensitive to the other's concerns on the PKK and Chechnya,
respectively. Erdogan is currently in Beijing for a four-day visit.

Gul has visited Syria, with whom Turkey's relations are now much better,
Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, where he once worked at the Jeddah's Islamic
Development Bank (1983-91) and Iran. Disappointed with the EU response on
the question of Turkey's entry, the AKP leadership is now exploring all its
options and would like to strengthen relations with countries to the east,
including India.

Willy-nilly, though, Turkey is getting sucked into the US war preparations,
with the Turkish military apparently keen to join the US this time. But the
military wants the politicians to take the final decision. In 1990-91, the
chief of the general staff, General Tormutay, resigned in protest against
Ozal's policies, unusual in a country where normally prime ministers have
been made to resign by the generals.

Either way, Turkey has its own plans for the days after a US war on Iraq.
Foreign Minister Yasar Yakis reasserted Turkey's "legitimate and strategic
interests" in the northern Iraq areas of Mosul and Kirkuk in an interview
published by the Istanbul-based Hurriyet on January 6. Kirkuk is an Iraqi
city under the current control of the Iraqi government and one to which both
Turkey and the Iraqi Kurds have arguable claim.

Yakis said that while Turkey supports preserving the territorial integrity
of Iraq, Turkey would take "certain measures" if Baghdad authorities "cannot
control the developments in their country" as a result of a possible war.
Yakis called for equal rights for Turkomans (their kinsmen) in Iraq, and he
said that the oil in Turkoman-populated Mosul and Kirkuk belonged to Iraqis.
He then hinted that Turkey was pressured in 1926 to accept the borders
determined by the League of Nations at the 1922-23 Lausanne Conference.

Yakis also said that Turkey would prefer that any action against Iraq should
be handled within the framework of NATO, because it would give his country
"legitimate grounds" to support such an operation. Later elaborating, Gul
added, "We attribute importance to the preservation of Iraq's territorial
integrity", adding that "Iraq's resources should be spent for the benefit of
[the] Iraqi people. Of course, commercial relations and mutual efforts would
be further improved after peace and stability are provided in the region".
He added that "there will be joint ventures [in Mosul and Kirkuk]. Many
companies will be established, and all the countries of the region will
benefit from the blessings of the region."

General Yasar Buyukanit, deputy chief of General Staff, recently said that
the US had requested Turkey for assistance six months ago, and it was
getting impatient. "A northern front would be decisive both politically and
militarily. With such a front, it would be far quicker and less risky for
the US to achieve its goal." This deterrent threat could even perhaps avert
a war, as some diplomats feel that Turkey's current reluctance could lead
Saddam to make a miscalculation and bring on a war. But Buyukanit said that
"there is a need for deterrent cooperation with the US".

As is happening now, the AKP government has given permission for necessary
US inspections of Turkey's military bases and ports. Buyukanit stressed that
a more comprehensive decision allowing upgrading of military bases, dispatch
of Turkish troops to Iraq and stationing of US soldiers in Turkey must be
made soon.

Apart from the NATO-committed Incirlik base near Adana, the US wants use of
other bases at Diyarbakir, Batman, Mus and Malatya in south and east Turkey.
A team from the US has already inspected these military airbases. It is
preparing to rectify shortcomings to upgrade them for war. And with Turkish
government approval, US planes could be deployed at the bases beginning in
February.

The US has applied for the use of airports elsewhere, including Istanbul.
But more important, the US wants areas in the Kurdish region in east and
southeast Turkey to garrison around 80,000 troops for a ground attack
against Kurdish north Iraq and further south.

These bases do need upgrading. On January 8, a Turkish Airlines passenger
jet crashed in fog in Diyarbakir, killing 75 people and injuring five
others. Civilian aircraft are handled on a part of the military airfield.
The next day, two F-4 fighter jets collided in heavy fog during a training
flight near Malatya, killing four pilots.

The Incirlik base was used during the 1990-91 Gulf war, and since then it
has been used for bombing runs over Iraq by US and British planes to protect
the Kurds in north Iraq. It was also used in the war against the Taliban and
al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

A move to allow foreign troops into the country, though, requires
parliament's approval. About Turkey dispatching troops to north Iraq, which
the Pentagon doesn't favor, Buyukanit underlined that "we aren't saying,
let's go and fight. Yet no one has ever told us that we can't join a
military campaign." When reminded of 1991 Gulf War, when the Ozal government
had pressed for Turkey's involvement, while the General Staff resisted - a
virtual mirror image of the current situation - Buyukanit replied, "In 1991,
the situation was completely different. At that time, the US had asked
Turkey to open a northern front without putting forward any conditions
[plans].

"Their current requests are far more reasonable [specific]. We, as the
military, want to hold back any possible wave of refugees from northern Iraq
before they reach our borders in order not to repeat the experience Turkey
faced during the Gulf War. Moreover, we should assume a role if the country
wants to have a say in the post-Saddam period."

Many thousand Turkish troops are already in north Iraq. Naturally, the
Turkish media is openly discussing what Turkey should or could do. Writing
recently in the prominent Turkish daily Milliyet, veteran columnist Sami
Kohen acknowledged that apart from Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, "the
other [reason for invasion] has to do with the US quest to take oil
resources under its control. The real US goal is much more comprehensive and
suffused with hubris. The Bush administration wants to establish an
altogether 'new order' across the entire region. And that involves necessary
regime changes in certain countries in this region in line with the US
strategic concerns.

"Thus, the whole problem comes down to overcoming such obstacles as Saddam
in order to lay the foundations of US dominance over the Middle East. This
is the underlying and long-term goal the US has its sights on in carrying
out a possible military campaign in Iraq."

Kohen concluded that as the US cannot be dissuaded, it is preferable for
Turkey to take sides with the Bush administration. "Unsurprisingly, Ankara's
top political and military officials have begun to think more and more that
Turkey shouldn't stand outside of a war in Iraq. They see the disadvantages
of doing so, outweighing its advantages. Should Turkey decline to
participate in a common front in this war alongside the US, this will no
doubt end up costing us American support that we need in a great many
areas," he added.

Another columnist of the paper, Fikret Bila, summed up the thinking of the
Turkish government, "The US will do what it's determined to do. It will do
this whether Turkey supports it or not. In such a situation, Ankara's
putting itself into the thick of developments will yield better results than
sitting outside."

Writing about the reluctance of the Turkish government, the New York Times
quoted a senior US official, "From the military planning standpoint, we have
just about reached the critical mass point for a yes or no from Turkey. It
was emphasized that the US needed several weeks for preparations and if
Turkey waited until January 27 - the day a UN weapons inspectors' report was
to be issued - to make a decision, as it wanted, it might be too late. While
the US could conduct a successful attack to oust Saddam Hussein without
access to land bases in Turkey, such an attack would be harder and uglier."

Bahrain and Qatar, meanwhile, have reportedly agreed to host American forces
for as long as it takes to finish the job. "Even Saudi Arabia will probably
swallow its pride and allow the US military to use the key Prince Sultan
airbase to run the air campaign, the first phase of the war. Jordan, which
shares a small but strategic border with western Iraq, has made its choice.
Despite public opposition to the war from native Jordanians and the large
Palestinian population, King Abdullah II has made clear that he will not
stand in the way of any US-led operation," reported the Times of London.

Indeed, Saudi Arabia will relent under pressure and allow the US to use its
airbases, but unlike 1990-91 it will not agree to its territory being used
for basing US troops and for launching ground attacks against Iraq.

Kuwait, on whom Iraq has not in its heart given up its territorial claims
and which was a victim of Iraq's original aggression in 1990, will provide
full support and its territory for attack against Iraq. This even though
Saddam recently apologized to the Kuwaiti people for his aggression in
1990-91, and some Kuwaitis attacked and killed US soldiers while they were
on military exercises with Kuwaiti armed forces.

And yes, even Jordan, under duress, will agree. But with 60 percent of the
population of Palestinian origin, the half English King Abdullah and half
American Crown Prince Hamza Hussein and the Hashemite kingdom will be placed
under enormous strains and face tremendous turmoil. No wonder King Abdullah
has been repeating for many months that an attack against Iraq will open a
Pandora's box.

A war against Iraq will inflict more misery on the hapless Iraqi people.
Nearly a million are already estimated to have died from malnutrition and
for lack of medicine (the Iraqi population is now 16 percent smaller than it
was in 1990).

According to Denis Halliday, former United Nations assistant secretary
general, the sanctions imposed on Iraq since 1990 have had "genocidal
consequences". Halliday, who resigned as the UN humanitarian coordinator in
Baghdad in 1998, told Gulf News recently that the Security Council "is a
body out of control and corrupted by the US".

Commenting on the oil for food program, he said, "The Iraqis have now sold
$60 billion worth of oil under this program, but have received less than $20
billion worth of food, medicine and basic equipment and utilities such as
water, agriculture, education and healthcare. Some $40 billion has
disappeared. It has gone into Kuwait, as compensation, to finance the UN
presence in this country, with its 4,500 personnel. It is paying for the new
military inspections. It is paying for somebody's establishment in New York,
Paris and Rome. It is ridiculous. The Iraqi people, who have great
difficulties because of a lack of money for sophisticated drugs or
equipment, are financing large parts of the UN system. It is a crime, a
financial crime you might say, being imposed on the Iraqi people."

Thus the seeds are being sown for future terrorism and terrorists, pitting
Muslims against Christians - a new Crusade against jihad. The US and its
allies might win in the short term, and at great human cost. But have they
thought of the days after, and the long term?

K Gajendra Singh, Indian ambassador (retired), served as ambassador to
Turkey from August 1992 to April 1996. Prior to that, he served terms as
ambassador to Jordan, Romania and Senegal. He is currently chairman of the
Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies.