U.S. Missteps Led to Failed Diplomacy

The Washington Post ^ | 3/16/2003 | Glenn Kessler and Mike Allen

[a_Turk]

-Snip!-

The decision by Turkey's parliament to reject a U.S. request to station troops in the country is another example in which the current administration has asked for more and expended less effort.

In 1990, Baker made three trips to Turkey in five months. Bush's father called the Turkish leader 55 to 60 times after Turkey agreed to shut down an oil pipeline to Iraq before the Persian Gulf War began, said Morton Abramowitz, then U.S. ambassador to Turkey. The Turkish parliament was asked to open its bases to the United States after the bombs began to fall.

This time, not only did the United States want to insert 62,000 troops in Turkey, but also it demanded a vote when the United States insisted it was trying to disarm Iraq peacefully; Turkish officials said administration officials demanded a vote as quickly as possible. Turkish officials made one trip to Washington, but Powell didn't visit Turkey once during this period. Bush had three calls or meetings with Turkish leaders, according to White House records.

[a_Turk]

ping

[wimpycat]

Sorry, but I'm not buying the premise of the article.

[aristotleman]

State an argument for not buying this article and let us discuss it.

[mewzilla]

The Turkish gov't thought that the parliament would approve the deployment. Only way we screwed up is by giving Saddamn time to buy off some Turkish politicians. But they'll reap what they've sown. We've told them to kiss that 15 billion good-bye. Be interesting to see what their market does tomorrow.

[LarryM]

The argument is that Turkey now has an Islamist government and didn't in 1991. Also, the Soviet Union still existed in 1991 and Turkey needed us more then. The premise of this article is that kissing Turkey's behind repeatedly would have gotten the opposite result than we got. If France dangled EU membership in front of Turkey in exchange for Turkey blocking US deployment, then this article becomes total hogwash.

[wimpycat]

No.

[mc10]

one mistake that i believe 43 would not have made that it appears 41 did...can't help but believe that jr would have taken all of iraq and disposed of hussein in 91...nk would perhaps have already been dealt with as well

[Dog Gone]

It's not as if we quickly demanded a vote and Turkey was caught off-guard. The process dragged on for weeks.

And the implication that the US wasn't in constant communication with Turkey is totally wrong. We worked extensively with them in formulating an aid package, and framework for post-war Iraq. That wasn't done by email.

The notion that everything would have been better if only Colin Powell had visited Turkey is naive. I would hope that Turkish leaders aren't so easily flattered.

Of course the Washington Post is going to blame Bush for the outcome in Turkey. They blame him for everything else.

[cactusSharp]

ah the ole magic pea trick to the sheeple again...
...anyone sick of the dems soundbite that Dubya cannot get his daddies coalition ????????????????????/

well crap, they were two different things...in '91
were to liberate Kuwait and get Saddam to scream uncle (Sam)...He did and HE STAYED.....with Chirac et al doing business (nukes, oil, euro monies ) but it was known in
91 FROM JUMP that Saddam would stay in Iraq.....so they all
came "to the coalition" paid to be there too....

but this time................SADDAM gos too
DEAD or ALIVE....well that screws the euro pooch.....

so it is about, oil, money and human abuses and dems, France Fried and et al are the real enemies.....

ain't it nice that finally the one with the clout to put
a foot in their ass ,wears boots....

[wimpycat]

The premise of the article is that U.S. missteps led to failed diplomacy. Inherent in that premise is that Turkish missteps did not or that there were no Turkish missteps. Now if you believe the Turks made no missteps, that the Turks have no responsibility in this, that's fine. But if you think both sides would do certain things over again if they could turn back the clock, then that's even better.

[ChemistCat]

Thanks for the ping. What this tells me if it is true is that our government never did take its request to the Turkish government seriously. We knew the extent of cooperation we could expect, and asking for more was pro-forma.

The real insult from us to the Turkish government occured after the first Gulf War, when we did not follow through on promised aid, nor help them with the refugees and increase in terrorism that resulted from the first Gulf War. If President Bush didn't send serious diplomatic effort Turkey's way, it stands to reason that he didn't ever expect Turkey to come through on this.

One theory I have is that this has let the Turkish government publically distance itself from us, keeping a lid on dissent in the streets, while, simultaneously, we are allowed to pour troops and assets through our bases there without publicity. Turkey really does have an interest in a defeat for Saddam Hussein followed by regime change. This lets everybody have their cake and eat it too--we just don't call it 'cake'....

[Dr. Frank fan]

Actually, Turkey's missteps led to them losing out on 15 billion dollars.

[wimpycat]

How many times have we visited Australia, or has Australia visited us? And yet they are helping us out. How many times have we visited Italy, or Bulgaria, or Poland, and vice versa? And yet they are helping us out.

[a_Turk]

>> aid package

I guess that was not as important as the US delegates thought it was. Probably too much communication to blame. /sarc

I can't see how vital national security concerns that the Turks have can be addressed in good faith by a few minions sent there to hammer out a troop agreement. These were ambassador level people who have been negotiating with the prime minister and the foreign minister. Ambassadors cannot negotiate, all they are authorized to do is message the expectations of their masters..

But no matter what some may think or say, I don't expect fighting between the US and Turkey.

Also, the Iraki opposition is gathered in Ankara today, including the Turkmen, and the US envoy Khalilzad. Didn't see any press on that and didn't feel like translating.

Anyway, I'm going to be too busy to answer any messages until about four hours from now. Maybe talk to you more then..

[wimpycat]

That's not to say the Turks aren't helping us out, because they are.

[FreeLibertarian]

Reading the entire article has further confirmed what I had already observed, the Bush administration has botched the Iraqi mess. The results of their bungling will harm the U.S. far into the future.

[Cicero]

Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes. When did the Washington ComPost ever wish the Republicans well?

No, it's too bad about Turkey. They've miscalculated and made the wrong choice.

[Beck_isright]

Call me Mr. Skeptic, but I still don't trust the Clinton appointed EU/French friendly Ambassador to Turkey. Something just doesn't smell right and it's coming from the State Department as usual. I hope Powell steps down from State after this war is over. Put Wolfowitz in charge and bring back the days of big stick diplomacy. We're going to need it as we withdraw from the UN and NATO.

[Consort]

The Muslims have defeated Turkey. The Turks should just surrender and put the Star and Crescent on their flag — oops, they already have.