Turkey wants northern Iraq

Daily Times ^

[ScholarWarrior]

I think a_Turk is suggesting the US deal was bait and switch. That is, Turkey was promised a DMZ to prevent Kurdish mass exodus to Turkey, adn they thought that meant they could go take the oil fields.

[a_Turk]

>> Turkey wanted to force America to abandon its plans, that was the entire point of Turkish intransigance.

Whoa, that's a couple steps too many: We've been negotiating in good faith for a contiguous, multi-ethnic, democratic Irak. We just don't want your (worst case) next democratic administration repeat Clinton's blunder in northern Irak.

It's going to be hard to break you guys of your bad habit of just using us it seems.

[a_Turk]

I'm Turkish Rob, and we're all here tring to understand what is really going on between the diplomats of our two countries.

[marron]

I'd say our boys figured something out about you, and it must smell reeeealy bad to them..

Any ideas? I'm checking my shoes...

I'll give you my take, or suspicion, and you can tell me how far off I am. First, the new civilian government is not in favor of doing this as a partner to the US. Why should Turkey run the risk associated with the overthrow of Saddam, only to cede control of the north to the US? Any promise of a say in re-shaping Iraq is merely theoretical if the US is at the helm. If Turkey closes the north to the US, it doesn't actually stop the invasion, Turkish forces become in effect the blocking forces for any Iraqi retreat north, but it leaves Turkey in control of the north.

It actually frees up US forces for the attacks from the south and west. And an attack from the north, coming through the mountains, is not risk free. Its closer in miles to Baghdad, but more difficult and dangerous. Turkey would run that risk in place of us. But if the US wants to occupy the north for reasons having other than to do with overthrowing Saddam, they will have to go to extra effort and delay to get there, and Turkey will have the advantage.

With Turkey in control of the north, with 50 or 60 thousand troops on the ground, she doesn't have to trust to US honor that she will have a place at the table. It becomes a given.

My take is that this scenario isn't the end of the world for us. But it does put us in the position of having to trust Turkish intentions. To work well will require crystal clarity between our planners and yours. And it requires some faith on our part that the Turks aren't going to stir up a war in the north that we would want nothing to do with.

Such a situation wouldn't have to occur, if cool heads prevail. I suspect, though, that now rather than just a race to Baghdad, we will also have a race to Kirkuk. We will be both occupying the same ground, but for slightly different reasons. This is going to require some cool heads.

[tomahawk]

I belive it is an undeniable fact that Turkey's value in U.S. eyes has fallen sharply this week. It didn't need to be so. The Islamists have crapped on Turkish national interests, in my opinion. Their fears of Kurdish nationalism and insistence on doing things their way is going to stoke the Kurdish issue even more than had Turkey done what the U.S. asked. The U.S. wants stability in post-Saddam Iraq as much as Turkey, but the Turks have made the U.S. consider Plan B, where stability takes a back seat to obtaining military victory at a higher cost.

[BlackJack]

Turkey does not want a Kurdish state that could be powerful with lots of oil money from Kirkuk.

Kurds say the Turks will be fought guerilla style
as they will be perceived as invaders.

Heck, Iran might take some territory, by proxy of course.

The plot thickens.

[ChemistCat]

Hi PR! a_Turk, please add me to your ping list? Cok tesakur ederim!

The whole question of "access to the oil" is almost senseless, but you can't get Joe Average to realize that. My neighbor is completely convinced that if we go to fight in Iraq, President Bush is personally going to be putting all the money from selling Iraqi oil INTO HIS OWN POCKET, and there is NO convincing her otherwise. But that is the person who watches network news and buys the products advertised thereon.

The reason the Russians, for instance, are concerned about who will have control over this oil post-war is simply concern that the price will be driven down by whoever has the ability to do it. Now what is really going to happen is that Saddam is going to destroy the oilfields to the best of his ability before he lets them be taken...which means that Iraqi production will be almost zip for quite awhile, and will have little bearing on what happens to the price. Nobody seems to realize that. Only a peaceful resolution to this current crisis (IE Saddam & his sons go to exile) is going to allow Iraqi oil to flood the market. Hence all the protest. It's the peacenik side that is truly obstructing the peace process--if they'd turn their anti-war pressure ON Saddam, it might be enough to bring about the very end they seek!

Turkey having the potential to control this oil is going to throw a huge wrench in this, and the more I think about it, the more I like the idea even better. They aren't irresponsible enough to flood the market. I don't think for a moment that they'll massacre anybody. They've moved into the 21st century along with us, instead of lagging back in Taliban times. YES, a more religious government has been elected, but it is well-reined-in by the military leadership. There will NOT be a Taliban in Turkey!!!!!

[ScholarWarrior]

Iran is already in Northern Iraq with I thought I heard 5,000 troops.

[RobFromGa]

I think a_Turk is suggesting the US deal was bait and switch. That is, Turkey was promised a DMZ to prevent Kurdish mass exodus to Turkey, adn they thought that meant they could go take the oil fields.

Why would this be a bait and switch? "They thought that meant" sounds pretty shaky to me. Misunderstanding maybe, but bait and switch.

If a-turk doesn't want to explain himself, more power to him, I've wasted enough time trying to figure him (and Turkey) out already. I have never been to Turkey, what little I know is mainly form threads a_Turk pinged me to.

I think we are at a crossroads here, and the USA needs to act soon. Turkey threw a big monkey wrench at the last minute.

It is going to cost us (USA) more money, and maybe more lives, without Turkey on board. But, we have no choice. They are sovereign and can make their own choices, and live with them.

[a_Turk]

>> If the Turkish military does it anyway, we now have a big problem.

Really.. That could be a real problem. Suddnly I feel like helping the democrats :^D

[AntiGuv]

Well, when I say "wanted to force America to abandon its plans" I mean in the sense of basing a large force in Turkey with Turkish units in the theater under American command. Moreover, I meant that the Turks want to contravene the creation of a federalist Iraq which would essential place the Kurdish regions on the road to eventual independence. So, I don't think we're in disagreement, although I think I could've worded myself better.

It's going to be hard to break you guys of your bad habit of just using us it seems.

I don't want us to just 'use' Turkey. Indeed, I want us to bring Turkey in as a genuine partner toward this whole affair. I think Turkey would have a great deal to offer in that respect. You may recall from some long while back (one of our first exchanges on FR) that I've held positions with the U.S. embassies in both Greece and Turkey. I would hope that I understand the region quite well. That all being said, I think the Turkish military establishment will take matters into its own hands if its hand is force.

The economic package wrangling was cover for behind-the-scenes military & political negotiations which have apparently fallen through. Turkey would've upped the ante until it received a satisfactory response in that latter respect. It appears that such agreement has not been forthcoming from the American side. Unfortunate, to say the least...

[a_Turk]

>> The Kurds are more democratic than the Turks, they've built up a little democracy in Northern Iraq

LOL! It's a couple of freaking feudal monarchies. A couple of ridiculous dictatorships. Man, WAKE UP!

[tomahawk]

If the Islamists weren't running the Turkish Govt. now, this whole thing would have been worked out weeks if not months ago.

[ScholarWarrior]

I admire your thoughts here.

If Turkey takes the north without US support, they will be the aggressor adn will have to deal with the UN / EU. Iran will move in anyway and won't care. This argument allows us to wash our hands of it. We'll definitely have to shut down the base in Incirlik.

And we get to do the dirty work in Baghdad.

[a_Turk]

>> The idea of Turkish troops in the Kurd area profoundly disturbs me.

Take a pill then.

>> do without them.

Doesn't look likely to have a picture without us in it.

[ChemistCat]

I've wasted enough time trying to figure him (and Turkey) out already.

That's sort of like a baby deciding it has wasted enough time trying to figure out how to walk. Come on. This is IMPORTANT. Turkey's next door neighbor has proclaimed he wants to destroy your way of life, your culture, and he has been working diligently on the means to do so. Turkey has offered to help but she wants something, and it may be better for all concerned if she gets it. 9/11 proved that a weapon of mass destruction can be made out of a handful of crazy people, a fake bomb, and some box knives. Saddam has spent billions in pursuit of even more effective ways to kill lots and lots of us. You can't afford to stalk off in a huff because someone to whom English is a second language didn't explain himself to your satisfaction. (I, personally, understood what he meant, and not because I've lived in Turkey.)

[AntiGuv]

I've been wondering when someone would bring up the Persians. Indeed, I would think that any partition of Iraq into "spheres of influence" would include a steady encroachment of Iranian influence in the Shi'ite south. I would be quite surprised if Iran has not already established rapport with the various ayatollahs in that region, who one would expect as the natural leadership of the southern Iraq populace.

[ScholarWarrior]

Sorry, I was speaking from the American perspective. From the Turkish perspective, they were told they could have a free hand in northern Iraq and when the commanders met, the Turks were told their troops would report to American commanders and under no circumstances were Turkish troops to take xyz cities.

They would read that as bait and switch.

[a_Turk]

>> Iraq will not be particioned for the Kurds or Turks.

Bingo. That's our goal. We've said from the very start that Irak should retain its territorial integrity.

[Edmund Burke]

Yugoslavia, an artificial creation of the WWI victors could not be saved. Why should we think that Iraq, a similar creation will continue to exist "as-is"? The US doesn't really give a damn about Kurdistan, nor does it give a damn about Iraq. Our only concern is that wacko Islamic fundamentalists or internationally aggressive dictators do not emerge at the helm.