| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| No vote on US troops before end of week |
| 2003-02-21 |
| The Turkish parliament will not vote on a request to station US troops inside the country before the end of the week, according to a statement issued by the office of the Turkish Prime Minister late Thursday. According to the statement from Prime Minister Abdullah GÃŒlâs office, there was no question of parliament voting on the issue before next week. The US has been pushing Turkey to make a decision on whether it will support a possible military strike against Iraq. This includes the deployment of US troops inside Turkey. The decision not to send the motion to parliament on Friday was confirmed by Turkish Foreign Minster Yaßar YakÜß on Thursday evening. Speaking after a meeting with the Prime Minister and other senior members of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government, YakÜß said that the motion would not be submitted on Friday and that it was not technically possible to do so. The Foreign Minister also denied that US Secretary of State Colin Powell had issued an ultimatum to Turkey to make a decision on the question of US troops on Thursday. Following both the US media and the Turkish media there are parts, which are interesting. The US media is projecting the stalling of allowing US troops only on economic parameters, while the Turkish media states that US officials are not straight in their pledges to inform Ankara about their war plans. In other words the US politicians donât seem to or donât want to understand the real meaning of the word âallyâ. As a Turk I am pro American, this in contradiction to my anti-war feelings, at the same time I am fully in support of my government not to let Turkey patronized in a way the US wants. If there is an alliance this must be in the true meaning of the word. |
| Posted by:Murat |
| #12 Sorry, Murat, but loose lips sink ships. France has had flapping lips in the past, and sold our technology, and plausible deniability sometimes is the way to go. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2003-02-21 12:52:46 |
| #11 You know, I'm starting to wonder if this is about money at all. Might the delay in getting NATO help have contributed to the delay in getting the US troops in? Most of the NATO is defensive - it will protect Turkey, but you might also say that it is force protection. |
| Posted by: Pete Stanley 2003-02-21 12:25:33 |
| #10 Darn, bad editing by me. I hope they use it constructively not squander it. My bad. |
| Posted by: mhw 2003-02-21 10:04:24 |
| #9 Murat, I doubt the embargo of Iran did much harm to the Turkish economy. With or without the embargo, the Turkish-Iranian trade is mostly indirect and minimal. Iraq is another matter. Before the Gulf War, Turkey was getting lots of $$$$ on pipeline fees transporting Iraqi oil. Since the Gulf War the pipeline fees are gone. However, the cross border trade between northern Iraq and Eastern Turkey is pretty significant and has increased quite a bit since the Gulf War. The problem with this trade is that it is mostly black and grey market and difficult to tax. Turkey still gets pipeline fees from oil of non Iraqi origin. They also get transit fees from oil transported by sea from the Black Sea. I saw number once on this in a WTO booklet but generally, WTO numbers can be either accurate or totally hosed and it takes more time than I have to decipher it. In any event, the funds the US provides to Turkey this time will be a good test for the current govt. Will they squander it or will they use it constructively? I hope for the first, but hopes have been dashed before. |
| Posted by: mhw 2003-02-21 09:57:05 |
| #8 Our plans for Iraq look to me like they were drawn from MacArthur, sans Hirohito, with shades of Marshall. The big difference on this go-round is that the Iraqis have the capability to finance their own reconstruction. If we can leave the appropriate institutions in place, we should be able to do an even better job than we did in Japan. |
| Posted by: Dishman 2003-02-21 09:03:50 |
| #7 mhw, Thatâs true, Turkeyâs national finances are in awful shape, as well as caused by corruption too, but the main cause are the international (mainly US) policies to embargo Iraq and Iran. Both unfortunately direct neighbours of Turkey and to the worst whilst biggest trading partners. I am not bashing the international policies of Iraq and Iran embargo, but the loss of that trade brought the Turkish economy to a near collapse (compare it for the US losing Canada and Mexico for trade and the impact of it). |
| Posted by: Murat 2003-02-21 08:59:27 |
| #6 Turkey's national finances are in awful shape but this is not an outcome of the Gulf War. The previous two Turkish administrations were marked by outrageous corruption and waste. The new government has made a lot of noise about fighting corruption and waste. Unfortunately, there is a long history of American foreign aid being used to promote more corruption and waste. |
| Posted by: mhw 2003-02-21 08:17:00 |
| #5 Murat, I agree. Our retreat from Iraq last time was shameful and is now coming back to haunt us. In addition, Turkey suffered financial losses last time that our friends, the Soddis, did not make up. Stability in the region has a higher importance to Turkey than to us. Another lesson to be learned from last time is not to assume that local forces can topple Saddam. I think many in Washington thought Saddam would be ousted by the locals and it didn't happen. |
| Posted by: Chuck 2003-02-21 07:42:53 |
| #4 re Bulldog The money issue is aired by the US media I guess as a kind pressurizing for a quick voting of the parliament. Meanwhile there are reports that there is only haggling over a remaining 5% of the total issues on which there have been no agreement reached as far as I have understand, and most of it are not money but political related issues according to the Turkish foreign ministry. |
| Posted by: Murat 2003-02-21 06:33:35 |
| #3 "...US politicians donât seem to or donât want to understand the real meaning of the word âallyâ. Alliances are built on trust. Money is obviously the overriding issue here, and I find it apalling that Turkey thinks it can hold the US to ransom in this way. If there are differences over the sharing of tactical information, it should be done behind closed doors. Generating another damaging rift like this is either: i) an untimely and clumsy money-grab which makes a mockery of NATO, yet again, or ii) a cynical attempt to demonstrate to the Turkish population (which is about 95% opposed to war) that the government in Ankara isn't simply towing the American line unquestioningly. What does trying to extort money in this way actually achieve for Turkey in the long run, Murat? |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2003-02-21 05:52:21 |
| #2 Ben, I am sure nobody expects to reveal plans to the population, be it the Turkish or US population. Besides when talking about war plans I donât think it is meant to know where bomb x is to be dropped. The meaning here is the after war plans, the structure of future Iraq and whether or not to disarm the militia who are armed to the teeth by the US as opposition forces etc. There are a lot of things on which the US acts very shallow. One has to understand that Turkey got dished up with all the mishaps of US planning during Gulfwar I, in which the US armed all kind of opposition militias. Most of these arms landed in the hands of terrorists leading to more than 30.000 victims between 1991 and 1998 in Turkey. Turkey is extra concerned this time that such will not reoccur and want to have a firm say in the after war arrangements. A US war against terror must not lead to another flare up of terror in the region because of the wild handouts of weapons to militias. It would be worth very much to know what these plans are. |
| Posted by: Murat 2003-02-21 05:51:38 |
| #1 I can sympathize with these views, however, there are operational and tactical concernes here that override. How many Iraqi spies are hiding amongst the Turkish population? How much intel does Iraq gleen from Turkey, whether Turkey knows it or not? That is the real reason to play this close to the vest. No one knows what the final war plans are, except the generals who formulated them and their immediate superiors. It is not a matter of not trusting Turkey, who has been an ally for some time, and will bear a terrible burden when the war starts. It is a matter of keeping our men alive, and successfully accomplishing the mission. YOu want to know more about what we plan? How much are you willing to pay for that knowledge, how many servicemen's lives are you willing to risk for it? If your knowing what the plan is reduced the chance for success, would that be worth it? |
| Posted by: Ben 2003-02-21 04:35:40 |