Posted on 05/09/2006 6:45:24 AM PDT by Wiz
The surfacing last year in Turkey of virulent anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism raises the question of what should U.S. relations with Turkey be in the interests of the U.S.?
To answer this question we need to answer the following first
Is Turkey a reliable ally?
What is Turkey’s strategic, political and economic value to the U.S.?
Is Turkey a friend or a foe of the U.S. (or somewhere in-between)?
I submit that Turkey is not a friend of the U.S.; that Turkey’s interests basically are not compatible with U.S. interests; that Turkey is of minimal strategic value to the U.S. and that Turkey is clearly and fundamentally an unreliable ally.
Let’s look at the record.
Is Turkey a reliable ally?
The evidence is overwhelming that Turkey is an unreliable ally whose actions damaged the U.S. during the Cold War decades and more recently in the 21st century.
I have written previously regarding Turkey’s traitorous conduct during the Cold War when Turkey actively aided the Soviet military to the serious detriment of the U.S. Let me repeat three examples.
1. During the 1973 Mid-East War, Turkey refused the U.S. military overflight rights to resupply Israel and granted the U.S.S.R. overland military convoy rights to resupply Syria and Iraq, and military overflight permission to resupply Egypt. A member of the Turkish Foreign Policy Institute in Ankara wrote:
During the Arab-Israeli war of 1973, Moscow’s overflights of Turkish airspace were tolerated. On the other hand, during the same Middle East conflict, Turkey refused to allow the United States refueling and reconnaissance facilities during the American airlift to Israel. (Karaosmanoglu, “Turkey’s Security and the Middle East,” 52 Foreign Affairs 157, 163, Fall 1983.)
(Excerpt) Read more at kurdistanobserver.servehttp.com ...
Yada yada.
By Muhamoud A Shaikh in London
The joint military exercises held in the Eastern Mediterranean by the US, Israel and Turkey last month are an ominous development, which Muslims must treat, and resist, as grave strategic threat to their security. But this unnatural alliance between a leading Muslim country and Islam's two foremost adverasaries - a product of desperation, up to a point - may yet serve, if effectively exploited, as an eye-opener to ordinary Muslims, who will now see who their real enemy is.
Arrogant actions and policies that fly in the face of Muslim sensitivities have a way of rebounding on their instigators, providing much-needed powerful boost to Islamic movements. For an example of this, look no further than Israeli prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu, whose relentless arrogance towards Palestinians has halted the implementation of the Oslo sellout and has lined up Palestinian grass-roots support behind Hamas.
Netanyahu's smooth predecessor, Shimon Peres, was of course equally determined to disinherit the Palestinians but he courted Arab dictators, including PLO leader Yasir Arafat, who helped him to present the Oslo accord as an opportunity for Palestinian emancipation. If Peres had not lost the 1996 Israeli elections, Palestine could have been sold down the line irretrievably by now with the backing of Arab regimes, and Israel would have become a political and economic partner of Middle East countries. (The recent Doha Middle East Economic conference would not have been boycott because Israel was invited).
In that sense, Netanyahu, whose arrogance has scuppered the US-led conspiracy, may be reasonably regarded as a God-send to Muslims. (Incidentally, the name 'Netanyahu' means 'God's gift' in Hebrew. The prime minister's grandfather, Nathan Mileikowsky, changed his name to Netanyahu when he arrived in Tel Aviv from Lithuania in 1930, deciding to speak only Hebrew from then onwards. Bibi's arrogance runs in the family, which has always regarded itself as a 'gift from God,' as one commentator recently described it).
Turkey's decision to engage in military exercises with a country led, and isolated, by such an offensive and arrogant character can safely be attributed to the desperation of a secular elite, whose raison d'etre, namely the westernization of Turkish society and its acceptance as a European country, has visibly failed.
Not only has the European Union rebuffed its long-standing application for membership but it has also invited the Greek Cypriots to join, shutting out the Turkish Cypriots. The US, Turkey's Nato ally, has also deserted it since the collapse of communism, siding with its traditional Greek rival over the Cyprus and Aegean sea issues. The electoral success of the Refah party in recent years has also demonstrated that the traditional respect for Islam in Turkey has not been rooted out by Kemalist secular policies. The judicial dissolution of Refah and the banning of its leaders from political activity is also a sign of desperation.
The idea of normal relations between Turkey and Israel is acceptable to a large number of Turks, with downright opposition confined to Islamic activists. After all, Egypt and Jordan have diplomatic relations with Israel. It was the start of the 'Oslo process' which provided cover for the Turkish generals to develop relations with Tel Aviv.
But when the new ties culminated in a military pact in 1996, many Turks began to believe that Ankara was going 'too far too quickly.' The sight of Turkish warships and aircraft, engaged in joint military exercises with their US and ISraeli counter-parts is bound to be offensive to many more, who will have seen that the pact has deeper roots and purposes than hitherto admitted.
When Ankara announced on December 11 that the four-day exercises would be held on January 5, the Israeli defence minister could not contain his jubilation, making clear the real strategic aims of the exercises in an ill-advised comment. 'When Turkey and Israel lock hands they will form a powerful fist,' he said - alerting Iran, Iraq and Syria, Turkey's immediate neighbours, that the manoeuvres have regional dimension which makes them direct targets.
After Mordechai's gaffe, and in an attempt to play down the sensitive nature of the exercises, officials of the three countries insisted that the real purpose was to enhance the ability of the three to stage efficient rescue missions at sea.
Egypt and Jordan were also invited to attend as observers - no doubt to add credibility to the claim that the exercises were not directed against any country, Arab or Muslim. Egypt turned down the invitation but Jordan send a contingent. Ironically, it was Egypt which accepted the invitation to join the US-led war against Iraq in 1991 and Jordan which declined.
When the exercises, code-named Reliant Mermaid, were held Jordan hastened to defend them as harmless. Admiral Husain Khassawneh of the Royal Jordanian Navy, who attended as an observer, said there was no threat to other Arab countries. 'It is a pure search and rescue operation,' he said. Colonel Husnu Dag, a representative of the Turkish general staff, said the sea manoeuvre was necessary because dense sea traffic in the eastern Mediterranean 'creates the need to respond to civilian emergencies.' But in an indirect allusion to the security aspect of the exercises, he added that 'Reliant Mermaid will promote peace and stability in the region.'
Israeli defence minister Mordechai was more direct though denying that the exercises were directed against any particular country. 'Those exercises serve Israel's ability to defend itself against any threat which may occur in the region.' But Muslim countries in the region were not taken in by the denials and criticised the manoeuvres as a hostile act which posed a serious military threat. Syria Iraq, Iran and Egypt all issued statements attacking them. Leading ulama and military analysts in those countries also joined the attack.
The Mufti of Syria, Shaikh Ahmad Kaftaru, for instance, said it was forbidded in Islam to co-operate with Israel asking 'why doesn't Turkey carry out exercises with Syria in the Miditerranian Sea or with Iran in the Caspian?'
The exercises are certainly an ominous development and form part of a US-led plot or stategy to encircle Islam. As such the new anti-Islamic alliance has great propaganda possibilities which can be used to galvanise Muslims. Unfortunately the initial criticism has already evaporated because many of the Muslim countries making it are US proxies. But Islamic movements are under no constraints to keep the issue alive.
Muslimedia: February 16-28, 1998
I gaurantee you we wont sell them the F-35. Let them buy the eurofighter or russian planes.
The Greek KKE and the kurd PKK are an odd set of allies to be pointing the finger at the Turks.
Perhaps you would like to add to this discussion.....;)
As such, Saladin's army had very large Turkish components, and were present when he captured Jerusalem, and later when Richard the Lionheart fought him to a standstill during the third crusade, not to mention that the Turks slaughtered many crusaders before they were able to reach the holy land.
At the rate the Turks are going, they'll have a Shariah government, I wouldn't be surprised if they were colluding with the Iranian mullahs either.
Which means the EU must love them. It'll be a grave disaster if they are admitted, because Iran will essentially have a voice in Europe. The whole area is going to touch off one day. Too much intermingling in the Balkans between Muslims and Europeans.
Do you have a source?
This from a nation which won't even acknowledge what they did to the Armenians, despiste the overwhelming evidence which supports Turkish crimes.
Do I win a prize?
Yes. The booby prize........;)
Naw, Ataturk knew what he was doing, that's why he left the military in charge. Here's your history lesson for today....
Modern Turkey was founded in 1923 from the Anatolian remnants of the defeated Ottoman Empire by national hero Mustafa KEMAL, who was later honored with the title Ataturk, or "Father of the Turks."
Under his authoritarian leadership, the country adopted wide-ranging social, legal, and political reforms. After a period of one-party rule, an experiment with multi-party politics led to the 1950 election victory of the opposition Democratic Party and the peaceful transfer of power.
Since then, Turkish political parties have multiplied, but democracy has been fractured by periods of instability and intermittent military coups (1960, 1971, 1980), which in each case eventually resulted in a return of political power to civilians.
In 1997, the military again helped engineer the ouster - popularly dubbed a "post-modern coup" - of the then Islamic-oriented government.
Turkey intervened militarily on Cyprus in 1974 to prevent a Greek takeover of the island and has since acted as patron state to the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus," which only Turkey recognizes.
A separatist insurgency begun in 1984 by the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) - now known as the People's Congress of Kurdistan or Kongra-Gel (KGK) - has dominated the Turkish military's attention and claimed more than 30,000 lives. After the capture of the group's leader in 1999, the insurgents largely withdrew from Turkey, mainly to northern Iraq.
In 2004, KGK announced an end to its ceasefire and attacks attributed to the KGK increased. Turkey joined the UN in 1945 and in 1952 it became a member of NATO. In 1964, Turkey became an associate member of the European Community; over the past decade, it has undertaken many reforms to strengthen its democracy and economy, enabling it to begin accession membership talks with the European Union.
As with many countries, it depends on who is in power. Some parties and leaders are quite pro-American; some are very anti-American.
Interesting links....
Iran's ambassador to Ankara added, "Of course the Kurds trained by Zionist agents are definitely not members of Kurdistan's Democratic Party or the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), since those Kurdish parties are well aware of the fact that such moves merely secure the Zionists' interests in the region and not that of the Iraqi Kurds."
.."now put that into the realm of what we have witnessed in the last month with 220,000 Turkish troops on the border with N. Iraq, 1,500 Turkish special forces stationed in N. Iraq"
Incorrect. I lived in Diyarbakir Turkey for two years (the Turkey-kurd frontline). This is about the same level of manning as during Operation Provide Comfort and Provide Comfort 2.......and the operations are exactly the same.
Turkish special forces go 8 km inside Northern Iraqi territory Reports have been confirmed that it was actions taken by Turkish troops this past Saturday which were the spark for specific complaints from Baghdad about increased Turkish military presence and action along the Northern Iraqi border.
According to these reports, Turkish armed forces, using infra-red cameras, spotted PKK terrorists crossing the border near Cukurca town, after which a special force team of around 100 soldiers proceeded to cross the border into Iraqi territory. The go-ahead to send in the special forces team was reportedly given from Ankara over the weekend. Recent meetings between Turkish and US officials have indicated that the US has given the nod to Turkish action on this front.
Meanwhile, Turkish intelligence forces have said that PKK members crossing from Northern Iraq to Turkish are particularly active near Semdinli, Cukurca, and the Sirnak-Gabar mountain range area. Since the beginning of April, there has been an increased presence of the Turkish armed forces in these areas. The number of Turkish troops in the region is over 200.000.
The special forces team sent into Northern Iraq by the Turkish military is composed of specifically chosen officers and sergeants. There have been as yet no reported clashes between the team and PKK members.
The PKK, which is on the the US, Eu and British terrorist organizations list, has terrorist camps in Iraq's Kurdish regions. Barzani and Talabani has allowed the PKK camps to stay. The PKK has been using these camps in order to attack Turkish targets in the region. Turkey argues that Baghdat Government and the local regional powersBarzani and Talabani should destroy the PKK terrorist camps instead of protesting Turkey's military operations in the region.
Dr. Nilgun Gulcan from USAK says that "Turkish soldiers are there because the PKK militants are there. And Barzani should understand that Turkey will always be in Northern Iraq as far as the PKK is there".
JTW and news agencies 30 April 2006
Sunday , 30 April 2006
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.