Snubbing Turkey--State Department missteps played a part in Saturday’s embarrassing vote.

National Review ^ | 3-3-03 | Joel Mowbray

[SJackson]

The Turkish parliament's failure this weekend to approve the basing of U.S. troops made headlines around the world, but the unreported backstory is how officials at the U.S. State Department have their fingerprints all over the mess in Ankara. With the margin of defeat so narrow — a mere four votes shy of a simple majority — State's unfortunate diplomacy in the past few months likely made the difference.

Winning the support of Turkey for any Iraq invasion was the State Department's job and now many in the White House are wondering what went wrong. Turkey has been a reluctant, but willing, partner during four months of negotiations. Media reports, however, pegged Turkey as attempting to be bought off by the U.S. for supporting an Iraqi invasion. That was one of the key problems.

News accounts airing details of the supposedly secret negotiations made Turkey's leadership look driven almost solely by money. "The leaks made Turkey look like a prostitute," complains one Turkish official. Part of this anger stems from the fact that the leaks claiming Turkey was still shaking down the U.S. for more money continued even after the economic issues had been agreed upon and taken off the table.

While the source of leaks can never be known for certain, but officials at both State and the Pentagon insist that the leaks were part of a coordinated campaign by State to strong-arm Turkey. If so, the tactic backfired.

But the leaks were only part of the problem. People familiar with the political scene in Turkey — as much as 90 percent of the public opposes war with Iraq — knew for months before Saturday that the vote in the parliament would be tight. In an effort to build more support among the Turkish military, the Pentagon wanted to send a delegation to Turkey in November. State refused. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage was adamant that the Pentagon not encroach on State's turf, and the military meeting was scuttled.

In fairness to the State Department, dealing with the Turkish leadership is not an easy task. Most of the members of the ruling Justice and Development Party lack the sophistication found in more seasoned governments. One Defense Department official who is an avid supporter of Turkey comments that Saturday's vote is a sign that it is "amateur hour" in the Turkish government. Further complicating matters, the top spot in the Turkish government is likely changing hands in a week, when the head of the Justice and Development Party, Tayyip Erdogan, becomes eligible for the prime-minister slot (which he will likely move into).

Erdogan supported the failed resolution, but changing leadership is a process that can take up to two weeks. Although some wire stories Sunday indicated that the Turkish parliament would not take up the resolution when it reconvenes Tuesday, Turkish officials insist that it could be voted on again this week. If that doesn't happen, though, the timetable could stretch out for an extra week or two as the new leadership is installed.

Discussions about a follow-up vote in parliament might have been moot if State had handled itself differently — in Iraq. According to a Turkish official, one of the items that members of the parliament were angriest about was the exclusion of Turkish-backed individuals from the leadership of the Iraqi opposition.

In a meeting Friday in Northern Iraq, six leaders were selected — including one backed by Iran and another who is popular with Saudi Arabia — but the leader of the group representing Iraq's sizeable Turkoman population was merely promised a position on some unspecified committee. The move puzzled many in the Bush administration. "State warmly embraced the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution (backed by Tehran) and went out of its way to keep Saudi Arabia happy, but then they decided to screw our ally," complains a Defense Department official.

It is unclear exactly how many votes were swayed by the previous day's snub in northern Iraq, but considering the resolution only failed by four votes out of 534 members present, State's actions there could have been the difference. Either way, it is a sore spot for many in the Bush administration — some of whom think the State Department angering Turkey was no accident. Notes a Defense Department official familiar with the Iraqi opposition groups: "Many top officials at State don't want to go to war in Iraq. State knew the politics of the situation, yet they excluded the group backed by Turkey right as the Turkish parliament was voting on the resolution. It makes you wonder: Is State trying to undermine the president?"

— Joel Mowbray is an NRO contributor and a Townhall.com columnist.

[marron]

This is upsetting, but the fact remains that we still have
Incirlik. If we lost that our situation would be very difficult. This alone is a very important concession and its importance cannot be overstated.

Our State department has been a problem as long as I can remember. They have always had what I interpreted as a leftist bias all during the Cold War, and nothing has really changed. They are Clintonists, but they were Clintonists before there was a Clinton.

Powell's great challenge has been to try and bring them on board, but it would have been an uphill battle no matter who was over there. They have been open in their contempt for Bush, they have not attempted to hide it. I doubt anything can be done about it with the present split in the Congress, but given a second term and a few more senators I would sanction an overhaul from the ground up. A good chunk of that deparment needs to be teaching junior college somewhere.

It will be difficult for us to occupy Kurdistan as quickly as we need to, but the primary objectives can be met another way. The oil fields can be seized with airborne troops. Thats what they are for. Heavier armor can follow from the south whenever they can get there. Likewise the need for a capping force to prevent an Iraqi retreat north can be handled by the air force from Incirlik along with that same airborne unit with perhaps the aid of Kurdish militia. That problem is do-able, Saddam can't retreat north.

We need to secure the north to make sure it doesn't become some kind of lawless enclave, but that is not something that has to happen in the first few days of the war. The Kurds themselves are already policing it, the Turks already have a small force there, and we have apparently already pre-positioned a force to take on the Al Qaedists that have settled along the border.

So this is annoying, but not fatal. The tanks and infantry floating in the Mediterranean could possibly be brought in via Jordan. The same $6 billion that was offered Turkey might be enough to cover the highway toll to bring them into Western Iraq. Its not exactly "northern" Iraq, but its a second front. It possible that we were already planning something like this, but quietly, and this situation will make it explicit, stealing the surprise element. But its still do-able.

And finally, on the issue of Kurdistan, I am fairly sympathetic to Kurdish aspirations. But not to PKK aspirations. You don't respond to a lovers quarrel with body blows, and you don't respond to a close tie vote in the Turkish parliament by seeking the dissollution of their country. Calls for an independent Kurdistan just to spite the Turks make pithy posts, but are not good policy.

The Kurds rightfully should have been given their own territory from the beginning, but this is now. If we do it right, Iraq becomes Kurdistan. Iraq has to be re-built as a free, or quasi-free, country, in which Kurds are free, as well as Arabs and Chaldeans and Turcs. Our challenge is to create, not a tiny Kurdish enclave in the north, but to extend the relative freedom they have created over the last 10 years to the whole country. "Free Kurdistan" should reach from Turkey to Kuwait, along with Free Arabstan etcetera.

I have no objection to Kurds carrying light weapons, I am after all a 2nd ammendment guy. But AntiAircraft weapons need to be in the hands of a formal military command. The reality is that such weapons are probably available on the black market, but we should be in the business of taking them off the market, not adding more merchandise to the market.

[a_Turk]

LOL! Seem honorable? Snickering...

What we Turks wanted was true partnership. We have been dieing for that.

I think the US should agree to keep the Kurds disarmed and sign the damned memorandum without asking Turkey to join in. That would open every door.

Money is of fifth, if not sixth importance. First: Are we two men looking eye to eye? Second, are we back to back in the war against terror? Third, will we diffuse ethnic tension by preventing ethnic cantons? Fourth, will all ethnic groups be founding members?

Forget the money.. Don't even think about bringing that up..

[Allan]

Thanks for the link.
Since I have reservations
to fly to Turkey
and across Turkey
this summer,
the prospect of Kurds with Stingers
does not delight me.

Perhaps some of the anti-Turkish ravers
on this and other threads
would like to join me.

They might then sing another tune.

[Thud]

I recently vetoed my 17 year-old daughter's request to go on a church mission to Turkey this summer, after she turns 18, to care for those abandoned by Turkish secular & Islamic charities. That concerned my fear of non-Kurdish terrorists. The whole area will be too unsettled after we conquer Iraq. This was a month ago, before the current mess started.

[prairiebreeze]

CNN today (I only have it and MSNBC)-anyway CNN hasn't uttered one word all day long about the MEDIA having any role in the decision of the Turk government. They totally are laying blame at Bush admin's feet saying they rushed Turkey too much. They don't say one word about their words or cartoons or anything.

Mum has been the only word about any media involvment from CNN. Hypocrites. Lots of CYA going on at CNN.

Prairie

[RobRoy]

>>Together with Turkey, we could have fought terror and fundamentalists, pacified the conquered lands and transformed their economies into modern trading powerhouses. <<

Not with the size of their muslim population.

If they were mostly Christian, at least in culture, it would be a grand possibility. But, alas, they ARE a muslim nation, even if technically secular in government (so was Iran). The country is a dead man walking, especially in this geopolitical environment.

[RobRoy]

Why is the Fez red?

[prairiebreeze]

Actually a_Turk would you please add me to your list?

thanks!

prairiebreeze

[tabsternager]

You're absolutely right. I've said it before and I'll just say it again: A country which continues to lie about and deny their own history of committing genocide is not a country to be trusted, period.

[Robert_Paulson2]

I think you may be overly confident in our ability to work in an environment permeated by the evil-doers from the house of Daschle.

We had to create a homeland security department to get around the "you can't fire us" traitors in the INS, CIA, FBI and NSA courtesy the breakfast club of billie blowjob...

What in the world makes YOU think we don't get submarined by these moles?
ie... certain sensitive information can be passed via CO's to networks and other nation's operatives, that can then be used to persuade 19 or twenty turkish fence sitters, to stay seated and abstain... from a critical vote to damage Bush's war efforts...

YOU DON'T THINK THIS STUFF HAPPENS? Then you are either one of them yourself... or in need of some reasoning capacity.

bravo sierra pure and simple it DOES happen... and when the bastards get caught... they resign, like the puke did last week from the state department... GASP! no less. And they give us the "Here is why I am leaving" crap in a nationally publicized letter. Just like the same old swan songs we get from whacko freepers when they get fed up with the rest of us and leave... What's it called? a mia culpa? a soliloquy?

whatever...
a little leaven leavens the lump and
one bad apple... etc...

State is screwed up.
Damaging efforts were apparently coming out of state, and CNN operatives passed it on to their buddies in RUSSIA and IRAQ, FRANCE and the GERMANS... wherein certain leaders in the Turkish parliament were blackmailed or bribed to sit this one out, in their own "best interests."

CNN pumped out the anti american crap... and the rest is now histoire.
STATE should have been all over this in the media IN TURKEY... and it was NOT. CNN should have been submarined on this, via our "levers of power." It was not. STATE department failure.

It's not Colins fault. He does not have the authority to fire all the state folks who do not support our president... roughly 2/3 of current staffing is from the Clinton era.

... get out of your denial.. NOBODY is blaming OUR team.. we are blaming the traitors on OUR TEAM which we are not able to fire... them being union members... and enemies of the state simultaeously.

[dixiechick2000]

"CNN today (I only have it and MSNBC)-"

Well, bless yer heart! You need a dish.;o)

" CNN hasn't uttered one word all day long about the MEDIA having any role in the decision of the Turk government. They totally are laying blame at Bush admin's feet saying they rushed Turkey too much. They don't say one word about their words or cartoons or anything."

I'm not surprised. How can they blame themselves? Typical liberal...they don't take responsiblity for the actions.

I'd bet that Turkey's Charge d'Affairs didn't make an appearance on CNN, either.

BTW, I just heard on a Portland, OR radio station that one of the Portland terrorist suspects just plead guilty.

[RobRoy]

>>That's why Turkey should help us change the geopolitical environment. <<

Yes, they should, but as long as they are predominantly muslim, they won't.

The heart of the entire problem we have right now, other than the general sinful heart of man, is ISLAM.

Ok, ok, a lot of opportunists are taking advantage of it, but that's in the "sinfull heart of man" category.

Remove islam as a political power and you do as much good as the defeat of Naziism brought.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The comments I have responded to are not ones claiming that State may have been undermined by some of its employees but rather those claiming these underlings are MAKING policy.

Me thinks you are extrapolating wildly if you believe I am unaware/unconcerned with moles and saboteurs.

It is not true these people can't be fired. That is not why the HSA was created. It is true that Union rules can cause difficulties which HSA can avoid but nothing prevents firing for cause at any federal agency.

How do you know the media was tipped off through State and not the Congress. I would bet on Congressional RATS.

And those I responded to WERE blaming OUR TEAM explicitly.

[Pharmer]

"Many top officials at State don't want to go to war in Iraq. State knew the politics of the situation, yet they excluded the group backed by Turkey right as the Turkish parliament was voting on the resolution. It makes you wonder: Is State trying to undermine the president?"

Yes, absolutely!! I know this for a fact. My Brother in law is one of them. He is a career diplomat, loves Powell, despises Bush. He has traveled all over the world since 1993 and has said how much the rest of the world hates the US. He says we should have signed Kyoto even if it was bad for the US and it based on bad science because it would have made the rest of the world "dislike us a little less". He also resents the fact that the Diplomatic corp has been edged out of the War on Terror and been supplanted by the Defence Dept. He has told me that the carreer diplomats are very frustrated as they are trying to negotiate treaties, grant visas and do other business oversees in an increasing hostile environment. I have asked him why he is blaming Bush for this? His answer was simple "Because he's stupid, the rest of the world can't be wrong." I remember he used to say the same about Warren Christopher and especially Madeline Albright. My feeling is that the carreer beaurocrats resent the elected ones because they don't see them as earning their position. I asked him why he continues to work for the goverment if he feels that way. "Simple, by law I have a job for life and a guaranteed pension!"

[happygrl]

Outstanding article on the failure of our State Department with respect to the debacle on the Turkish Parliament's vote.

[a_Turk]

>> the Turks should and do grasp that great change is coming to the Islamic world, and they will naturally want to be part of that change rather than left behind.

We were all excited that we were going to help bring Democracy to Irak after Gulf War 1...

[Thud]

The price of pulling out of Iraq too soon is continued terrorist attack at home. The American people are engaged in their Andrew Jackson persona. If the Arabs won't change or give us too much grief while we change them, they'll wish the Mongols were back. Hillary Belloc said:

"What ever happens,
we have got
the Maxim gun
and they have not."

Paraphrasing:

What ever happens
we have got
nuclear weapons
and they have not.

http://www.nationalinterest.org/issues/58/Mead.html

THE JACKSONIAN TRADITION
by Walter Russell Mead

"... The only reason Jacksonian opinion has ever accepted not to use nuclear weapons is the prospect of retaliation ..."

The rules changed on 9/11. Once Americans are attacked at home, there are no more rules save those we impose on ourselves for our own good. Americans in their Jacksonian persona have exterminated whole peoples. The Japanese were a lot tougher than the Arabs, and surrendered when they realized we really were about to kill all of them. We were going to gas their cities from the air if they hadn't surrendered after being nuked.

We have that power and will use it.