Turkish Parliament Rejects U.S. Plan to Send 62,000 Combat Troops to Turkey for Iraq War

AP ^

[TheOtherOne]

Turkish Parliament Rejects U.S. Plan to Send 62,000 Combat Troops to Turkey for Iraq War
By Louis Meixler Associated Press Writer
Published: Mar 1, 2003

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) - Turkey's parliament dealt a stunning blow to U.S. war planning Saturday by failing to approve a bill allowing in American combat troops to open a northern front against Iraq.

The decision, which likely will strain ties with Washington, marked a setback to U.S. efforts to show Saddam Hussein that he is surrounded and his neighbors support a U.S.-led coalition.

The parliament vote was 264-250 in favor, with 19 abstentions. But speaker Bulent Arinc said the outcome fell three votes short of the simple majority required by the constitution. He then closed parliament until Tuesday.

Prime Minister Abdullah Gul hastily met with top ministers and party leaders after the vote. Before going in, a visibly shaken and angry Gul said, "We will assess all this."

Gul did not speak after that meeting. Private NTV and CNN-Turk television stations quoted unnamed officials as saying the government was not planning to resubmit the motion to parliament.

Officials were not immediately available for comment. The leaders of Gul's Justice and Development Party are expected to meet Sunday to discuss what action to take.

U.S. Ambassador Robert Pearson rushed to the Foreign Ministry after the vote.

"We had certainly hoped for a favorable decision," he said. "We will wait for further information and advice from the government of Turkey about how we should proceed."

Turkish lawmakers had faced overwhelming public opposition to basing U.S. troops on Turkish soil. Yet Washington had been so sure of winning approval from close ally and NATO member Turkey, that ships carrying U.S. tanks are waiting off Turkey's coast for deployment and the U.S. military has thousands of tons of military equipment ready to unload at the southern Turkish port of Iskenderun.

For weeks, the Bush administration had been pressing Turkey to agree to a possible northern front, which would split Saddam Hussein's army between the north and the south, likely making a war shorter and less bloody.

The motion would have empowered Turkey's government to authorize the basing of up to 62,000 troops, 255 warplanes and 65 helicopters. In exchange, Washington promised $15 billion in loans and grants to cushion the Turkish economy from the impact of war.

Besides that funding, Turkey also risks losing Washington's support which was crucial in securing billions in loans that rescued the country during an economic crisis in 2001.

The United States has also pushed Turkey's eagerly sought candidacy in the European Union. And if Turkey does not agree to host U.S. forces, it loses a say in the future of neighboring Iraq if there is a war.

That is a critical issue for Turkey, which fears that a war could lead Kurds in northern Iraq to declare an independent state and in turn inspire Turkey's own Kurdish minority.

Nonetheless, Turkey's governing party had difficulty selling the unpopular measure to the Turkish people and could not push through the motion despite its overwhelming majority in parliament.

Polls show as much as 94 percent of the Muslim-dominated Turkish public opposes a war with Iraq. Before the vote, 50,000 Turks staged an anti-war rally near parliament as 4,000 police stood guard. They chanted "No to War" and "We don't want to be America's soldiers." Some carried banners that read: "The people will stop this war."

After the speaker nullified the vote, hundreds of Turks celebrated in the streets of central Ankara, shouting anti-U.S. slogans.

"We are all Iraqis ... We will not kill, we will not die," they chanted. They also accused the Islamic-rooted Justice party of "collaborating" with Washington.

The Justice party was planning to meet Sunday, said Reha Denemec, the party's deputy chairman. "We did not expect these results, but this is a democracy," he said.

AP-ES-03-01-03 2023EST

[WOSG]

Dont underestimate the forces that are trying to keep Saddam in power. Look at how France has disgraced itself.
There is a great fear of Iraqi liberation, for many different reasons.

[WOSG]

If we allow a Kurdish republic to form, it will destabalize the region for the next 200 years.
---

On the contrary, it is lack of Kurdish human rights that is destabilizing, just as a lack of democracy in Iraq and in the region generally which creates violence and destabilization.
If Kurds have rights and autonomy within the current national borders, it would be the best scenario.

All people deserve liberty and human rights.

[WOSG]

Turkey will regret this vote FAR MORE than the US will regret it. For us, it is a bump on the road to Baghdad ... for Turkey, a missed opportunity to be on the right side and on the winner's side.

[Beck_isright]

Actually I think Belgium, France, Germany AND Turkey will regret this. We could withdraw from the NATO treaty and then those nations would actually have to manufacture and spend funds on their own defense. Of course the French have a head start since they still have tens of thousands of those unused WWII era rifles.

[Beck_isright]

I agree there is a great fear of Iraqi liberation. Sadly, there are about only 100 postings and people who get that on this board. Iraqi liberation does not mean creating a new "Bosnia". I'll be curious to see how the world reacts when we seal the Syrian and Iranian borders off from Iraq with our military AND discover just how much crap the Frogs and Germans were involved with regarding WMD's. The next few weeks will be quite interesting....

[Beck_isright]

My only problem is that the Kurds have shown far more loyalty to their communist supporters and the Iranians than to us. I will not trust them as they are as backwards as the Taliban. Give them equal rights in a united, democratic Iraq, and I think everyone there flourishes in 10 years.

[WOSG]

Dont confuse the Kurds with one kurdish group (the PKK).
it's the lack of Kurdish human rights that has allowed these groups to take hold. But under "operation Provide Comfort" the kurds themselves, under autonomy, have proven able to govern themselves far better and more peaceably than under saddam hussein or anyone else - they are flourishing under what little freedom they have.

[Beck_isright]

The problem not just with the PKK, but some of the other groups in the north is their strong relationship with Iran. Because we are not Muslim, they do not trust us and especially after the 91-92 fiasco. I would prefer though a single Iraq with a non-theocratic government and strong military based on secular ideals.

[WOSG]

Iraqi liberation does not mean creating a new "Bosnia".
---

Messes like Bosnia were a consequence of UN-oriented doctrines.

The Liberation of Iraq will be quite different.

[Beck_isright]

That's what I'm counting on. I hope we have the stomach to deal with Iran now. They are the big salami in the region. And we have to pacify the Shi'ites in the South and disarm them immediately after we occupy Baghdad.

[WOSG]

Again, your thinking is warped by too much 'geopolitical' thinking... this is the kind of thinking that made Kissinger screw the kurds 30 years ago. the kurds have turned to those who will help them because THE COUNTRIES THAT RULE OF THEM HAVE COMMITTED GENOCIDE AGAINST THEM.

Here we are discussing how USA may ally with turkey or not, and you are blaming Kurds - who have so *little* power - for being promiscuous in their friends.

All the Kurds really want is FREEDOM. Speak their own language, teach their kids and live their lives.
They can do it as a part of federated Iraq.
I think the USA can handle that as part of the liberation of Iraq. Easily. And the kurds wont ask for $30 billion.

[snopercod]

Boycot Bay Leaves from Turkey! (That's their only export, isn't it?)

[WOSG]

We just got the biggest Al Quaeda fish short of OBL.

We get Saddam Hussein and get his Iraqi intelligence files and we will have hooks into almost all the terror networks.

Victory is at hand. We just have to push our way into Iraq.

Iran can be taken care of through support of democracy and human rights in Iran. The Theocrats of Tehrana are hated by their own people, just as saddam Hussein is hated by his own people. IMHO, we dont need to do anything militarily in Iran.

"And we have to pacify the Shi'ites in the South and disarm them immediately after we occupy Baghdad." hmmm. that sounds like UN thinking, only lead to troulbe. the last man to disarm the Shiites was Saddam Hussein. They need FREEDOM not DISARMAMENT.

[TheOtherOne]

Boycot Bay Leaves from Turkey! (That's their only export, isn't it?)

Funny you should say that. I love those little cornishon mini pickels. I usually buy a French brand, and proudly last week I switched to a new non-french brand -- a Turkish brand. Can't win.

[WOSG]

oh yeah, and when the Shiites were fighting Saddam and trying to liberate their own country, the US stood by while Saddam killed 30,000 shiites and an equal number of kurds, in 1991.
the rebels were close to winning, though.

You might think that those of us who believe in 2nd amendment rights for Americans might see why disarming people may leave them susceptible to be victims to dictatorship.

Dont fear freedom for people.

[RobbyS]

There's something very disturbing going on within our State Department. I would like you to elaborate on this point.

[Mr Rogers]

"The Persian Gulf War proved that the U.S. does not need Turkey regarding our use of force against Saddam Hussein. Turkey refused the use of its air space and Incirlik during Desert Shield from August 2, 1990 to January 16, 1991; refused the U.S. request to open a second front against Iraq (Wash. Post, Jan. 16, 1991, at A6, col. 5) and allowed large-scale smuggling along its 206 mile border with Iraq (Wall Street Journal Oct. 30, 1990, at 1, col.1)."

Sorry - but I was there! We flew out of Incirlik during both Desert Shield and Desert Storm. F-111Es & others. Just goes to show - don't put too much faith in the W Post.

[Beck_isright]

No, I'm not "blaming" the Kurds, I'm saying do not trust them. Having done my time in 91-93 in that region, I repeat, trust no one. Look out for the people, find the few responsible leaders, but do not trust the current leadership by and far. Genocide is a term used so loosely IMHO that if we were serious about it being a mitigating factor in our policies, China would be isolated forever. Don't preach the "Genocide" card against my opinion as the US has proven (along with our corporations relocation program) that the term only applies to our enemies and not our economic partners. From a puritanical geopolitical standpoint (since you want me to take that view) the death of another 100,000 Kurds is irrelevant to the big picture. We want our type of government, friendly to us, and screw the rest of the world, in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and Saudi Arabia. We want the Ruskies and ChiComs blocked from controlloing big oil and the Eurosocialists from benefitting from the profits. The reality? People are assets. And if you think otherwise, your as naive as the do-gooders in the Peace Corps.

[Beck_isright]

"There's something very disturbing going on within our State Department."

Sadly we still have leftovers from the LBJ-Kissinger-Albright philosophies holding mid-level positions which influence our foreign policy in the background. This agreement with Turkey was supposed to be a hard printed black and white signed agreement, yet our Ambassador to Turkey never signed it before the vote. We only committed to sign it "if" there was a "yes" vote. Bunk. I also have the bad feeling that there are still Albright operatives operating in State with the intent purpose of making W look bad to benefit the Demorats. Call me a tinfoil fruitcake if you'd like, but something tells me that those leftover bureaurats in the positions of limited, yet effective power, hold a higher loyalty to re-installing a DNC regime, than to the safety and well being of our military and the American people.

[Beck_isright]

I sadly disagree on Iran. As long as Russia is enabling the creation of a nuclear weapons production program, Iran will become the North Korea of the Mideast. There are bigger forces at play and geopolitics, especially relating to the antics of the ChiComs and Ruskies, can not ever be dismissed out of hand.