[Atlantic Bridge]

I have posted in the past that I think the key to the strategy in the middle east is to start with an independent Kurdistan. If we engaged Iran in such a manner we might earn back the support of these windvane politicians and wussie voters who don’t mind seeing a quick & victorious fight but hate seeing endless police action battles that don’t secure a country. I thought it would be cool for us to set up security for the Kurds on their southern border with Iraq, rewarding them for their bravery in defying Saddam Hussein. We put in some military bases there for, say, 20 years as part of the occupation of Iraq in their transition to democracy. We guarantee the autonomy of Iraqi Kurdistan as long as they don’t engage with Turkey. But that doesn’t say anything about engaging with Iranian Kurdistan. Within those 20 years the Kurds could have a secure and independent nation with expanding borders into Iran. After we close down the US bases, Kurdistan is on her own. But at least Kurdistan would be an independent nation with about half its territory carved out of Persia. If Turkey doesn’t relinquish her claim on Turkish Kurdistan after that, it isn’t our problem, it’s 2 of our allies fighting each other, one for independence and the other for regional primacy. I support democratic independence over a bullying arrogant minority. The kurds are the closest thing we have to friends in that area. They fought against Saddam (got nerve-gassed), they’re fighting against Iran, they squabble with our so-called ally Turkey (who didn’t allow Americans to operate in the north of Iraq this time around). It’s time for them to have their own country. They deserve it. They carve Kurdistan out of northern Iraq, northern Iran, and try to achieve some kind of autonomy in eastern Turkey. If Turkey gets angry, we let them know that there are consequences to turning your back on your “friend” when they need you. If the Turks want trouble, they can invade the Iraqi or Persian state of Kurdistan and kill americans to make their point. It wouldn’t be a wise move for them, they’d get their backsides handed to them and have eastern Turkey carved out of their country as a result. If such an act of betrayal to an ally means they get a thorn in their side, I would be happy with it. It’s time for people who call themselves our allies to put up or shut up. The Kurds have been putting up and deserve to be rewarded with an autonomous and sovereign Kurdistan, borne out of the blood of their own patriots. Should Turkey decide to make trouble with their Kurdish population, we would stay out of it, other than to guarantee sovereignty in the formerly Iranian and Iraqi portions of Kurdistan. When one of our allies wants to fight another of our allies, it’s a messy situation. If Turkey goes “into the war on Iran’s side” then they ain’t really our allies and that’s the end of that. I agree that it’s hard on troops and their families. We won the war 4 years ago. This aftermath is the nation builders and peacekeeper weenies realizing that they need to understand things like the “15 rules for understanding the Middle East” This was the strategic error that GWB committed. It was another brilliant military campaign but the followup should have been 4X as big. All those countries that don’t agree with sending troups to fight a war should have been willing to send in policemen and nurses to set up infrastructure and repair the country.

The key problem is that you Americans still have not understood that Iraq is irrelevant. To provoke the Turks would be extremely dumb. The by far biggest players in the area are the Turks and the Iranians. Turkey is at the crossroads in the moment. They have to decide between two opportunities:

1. integrate into Europe if the old continent gives them the chance to join both economically and culturally

or

2. they form together with the Iranians a economic and political bloc that can do trade with the ChiComs and the Russians.

I am sure that most Turks would prefer the first suggestion. Another inconsiderate intervention of America could take them this possibility and would drive them into the Iranian dungeon without any need.

Iraqis and their country are completely irrelevant in this "big" game. Because the Turks have problems with Kurdish terrorists since many decades they will do anything to get this problem under their control. They will not consider American interests, since the Kurdish treat is simply too dangerous to them for understandable reasons. They denied a US-attack from their soil because of that. If Americans are silly enough to shelter PKK-terrorists they have to deal with the consequences.

It is nothing new that the Turks rule over a excellent NATO Army with a combined troop strength of 1,054,750 soldiers. The second largest army in NATO anyway. In sharp difference to Iraq, Iran, Syria or whatever the Turks have big, modern and powerful forces that are easily able to match everything the US has in this area. In Iraq America had to deal with a few demoralized soldiers that were unwilling to fight and badly equipped (old T-72s, Russian outdated ordonance, a few patrol boats and Mig-15s, MiG-21s, MiG-27s), if the US forces should engage the Turks they would meet beside really gung-ho and well educated Turkish manpower, lots of their own technology (up-to-date block 50 F-16 i.e.) and top of the line European stuff like new Leopard IIs, wolfpacks of U-209 subs (which would cost the US-forces probably their first carrier-groups since WWII then), MEKO-frigates etc. etc. etc.. This is no Russian junk, this is really the best that can be bought on western weapon markets. Furthermore it is likely that the European allies of America will not follow the US in a non-defensive war against their NATO-ally Turkey. You should not forget that many countries in Europe have between 3 to 4% Turks among their population and that the links between Turkey and Europe are quite close in the meantime. Nearly all Germans i.e. have been to Turkey for holidays in the meantime. They like the country and the people. In difference to the wide-spread Blah-Blah in American media about "Eurarabia" the "German" Turks and the native Germans have usually a good relationship in the meantime. Therefore you can bet that most of Europe would not support a US-war against the Turks. It is for sure not funny to make a full scale war in the ME without the Ramstein AFB, without the German infrastructure but with a closed European airspace.

A independent "Kurdistan" will never emerge due to the power structure in the ME. Turkey and the Iranians do not want it and America is for sure not in the situation to push this through. Being a superpower does not mean that the US have no logical limits. The Turks could only be finished with nukes and I doubt that such is in the interest of America. Therefore the US politics is well advised in either offer Turkey their assistance in hunting and rounding up Kurdish terrorists or in leaving the area until the Turks finished their job.

[Kevmo]

Thanks for your response. The only other time I got a detailed response was from a Turk who obviously was so blinded in his bigotry towards Kurds that he could not reason coherently.

Iraqis and their country are completely irrelevant in this “big” game.
***I disagree on a strategic level, because we have so many forces there in Iraq and we could free up those forces for spreading democracy in the region.

Because the Turks have problems with Kurdish terrorists since many decades they will do anything to get this problem under their control. They will not consider American interests, since the Kurdish treat is simply too dangerous to them for understandable reasons.
***I don’t consider this an “American” interest thing. I consider this a “democratic republic” interest thing. It would be utterly suitable to trade the PKK terrorists to Turkey for Kurdish Autonomy in eastern Turkey. The only folks left in the region would be Kurds in their own country, and the PKK jerks would be handed over to Turkey to do with as they see fit. That has nothing to do with Americanism, that’s a pro-democracy, pro-indiginous autonomy approach to the region.

They denied a US-attack from their soil because of that. If Americans are silly enough to shelter PKK-terrorists they have to deal with the consequences.
***That simply appears to be an excuse. I don’t buy it and I wouldn’t be surprised if our foreign policy folks in the Bush Admin don’t buy it.

—snip supporting details —

Furthermore it is likely that the European allies of America will not follow the US in a non-defensive war against their NATO-ally Turkey.
***Then there’s nothing to worry about. If Turkey attacks the Kurds in Iraq, it will be a DEFENSIVe war against Turkey, not a “non-defensive” one.

You should not forget that many countries in Europe have between 3 to 4% Turks among their population and that the links between Turkey and Europe are quite close in the meantime.
***This doesn’t show up as a significant consideration to me. You can say that about any nationality — 3 to 4% of them are in any country in Europe.

Nearly all Germans i.e. have been to Turkey for holidays in the meantime. They like the country and the people.
***And they would continue to do so after a Kurdish-Turkish conflagration. But Turkey would be a smaller country.

In difference to the wide-spread Blah-Blah in American media about “Eurarabia” the “German” Turks and the native Germans have usually a good relationship in the meantime. Therefore you can bet that most of Europe would not support a US-war against the Turks.
***Most of Europe seems to not support the war in Iraq, so this is nothing new. Europeans all have independent democracies, so they might feel chummy with a new independent democratic Kurdistan, especially if the Kurds hand over PKK operatives.

It is for sure not funny to make a full scale war in the ME without the Ramstein AFB, without the German infrastructure but with a closed European airspace.
***An interesting strategic consideration. I agree it wouldn’t be funny but it could be possible. Americans are pretty gung-ho for helping indigenous peoples form an independent democracy.

A independent “Kurdistan” will never emerge due to the power structure in the ME.
***I’ll keep that crystal ball analysis in the forefront of my mind.

Turkey and the Iranians do not want it and America is for sure not in the situation to push this through.
***I disagree. I think we are in the position. But it wouldn’t be a push, more like a pull. The Kurds want democracy and autonomy and it is the right thing for them in Iraqi Kurdistan & Iranian Kurdistan. We’ll certainly help them with those 2 areas. When it comes to Turkish Kurdistan, we got trouble. I think Americans and Europeans would stand behind an indigenous, democratic people seeking independence rather than a bullying minority. I suppose it would remain to be seen.

Being a superpower does not mean that the US have no logical limits. The Turks could only be finished with nukes and I doubt that such is in the interest of America.
***The same was said about Iraq. There’s no need to “finish” the Turks, just get them to back off and give some local autonomy to an indigenous people.

Therefore the US politics is well advised in either offer Turkey their assistance in hunting and rounding up Kurdish terrorists or in leaving the area until the Turks finished their job.
***Spoken like a Turk whose blind hatred of Kurds cannot be hidden. Is that the case here?