Tweet
KURDISH CRISIS BOXES IN NEOCONS
by Muriel Mirak-Weissbach
Global Research
Tuesday, 6 November 2007, 11:24 am
When Secretary of State Condi Rice descended the stairs of her plane
in Ankara on November 2, she must have been thanking her lucking stars
that her security detail was shielding her from the massive groups
of Turkish demonstrators, who were wielding aggressive signs, some
showing her face as the backdrop for a target practicer's bulls-eye,
and others saying, "Terrorist Condi: Hands Off Turkey." Condi may
have been spared the embarrassment, but the signs and pickets were
prominently shown on international television news stations. And public
opinion polls reported that the popularity of the US among the Turks
is about as low as that of the US Congress among American voters.
The reason for the rising tide of anti-Americanism in Turkey is simple:
Washington is seen as the sponsor of the Kurdish terrorists who have
been killing Turkish soldiers, from their safe haven in US-occupied
northern Iraq.
Turkey is a long-term US ally and staunch NATO member, whose Incirlik
military base has functioned as a vital launching pad for US operations
into Afghanistan and Iraq. Thanks to the insanity emanating from
the Bush-Cheney cabal in Washington, this crucial regional ally has
turned into not only a leading critic of their botched Iraq policy,
but potentially also a "break-away ally" who will challenge the US
in the region, in pursuit of aims it rightly defines as in its own
vital national self-interest.
"Kurdistan"
The name of the game is "Kurdistan." Since the terrorist Kurdish
Workers Party, known as the PKK, has recently initiated a new wave
of attacks against Turkish targets, killing dozens of soldiers in
southeastern Turkey and abducting others, the conflict between the
Kurdish insurgents, who aim at establishing an independent "Kurdistan"
in a region overlapping Turkey, Iran and Syria, on the one hand, and
the sovereign Turkish nation, on the other, has reached such a point
that memories of the tragic 23-year-long struggle and its 30,000 dead,
have been vividly awakened. No one in Turkey wants that deadly process
to be repeated.
This time around, however, the conflict takes on a strategic dimension:
it is not "only" Turkey vs. a domestic insurgent force--the PKK--, but,
potentially, a new conflict in Southwest Asia as a whole, vectored
on war-torn Iraq. For, the PKK, which has recently raised its ugly
head again, is operating not out of Turkey, but out of northern Iraq,
in what is known as the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG). And this
region, which enjoys relative autonomy, is under the control of the
United States, the occupying power. Thus, since the PKK renewed its
terrorist attacks against Turkish military targets, {from inside Iraq},
the government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the military establishment,
have demanded that the US intervene to disarm the PKK, apprehend its
leading figures and extradite them to Turkey.
Paying demonstrative lip service to the fable that the Iraqi government
be "sovereign," Ankara has also pressed the government of Nouri
al-Maliki to move against the PKK.
The crisis reached an initial climax in mid-October, when, following
PKK killings of Turkish troops, the Turkish parliament voted to approve
a government plan to organize cross-border incursions into northern
Iraq, in hot pursuit of the terrorists. Impetus for the vote had been
provided by passage of a resolution in the US House Foreign Relations
Committee, on October 10, which acknowledged the 1915 massacres of
Armenians in Turkey as "genocide." Turkey saw the committee vote
as an affront, as demonstrating an "irresponsible attitude" which
could jeopardize US-Turkish relations, and responded by recalling its
ambassador from Washington. Furthermore, it was mooted that Turkey
could close the vital Incirlik base to US operations.
After another 17 Turkish soldiers were killed by PKK terrorists on
October 21, the Turkish cabinet went into emergency session. Prime
Minister Erdogan, under tremendous domestic pressure to move against
the threat, told the London {Times} on October 22, that his country
would move to smash the PKK in northern Iraq. "The target of this
operation," he explained, "is definitely not Iraq's territorial
integrity or its political unity. The target of this operation is the
terror organization based in the north of Iraq" which "must be driven
out ... its training camps ... dismantled and its leaders ... handed
over." Erdogan minced no words regarding the US reponsibility. "In
northern Iraq," he said, "we feel that both the terrorist organization
and the [Kurdish regional] administration there are sheltering behind
America." He went on to speak about a "trilateral mechanism" which
had been discussed, among the US, Iraq and Turkey to deal with the
problem, but lamented that it had led nowhere.
The decision by the Turkish parliament to approve cross-border
incursions into northern Iraq, sounded an alarm bell in Washington. The
well-grounded fear among government officials was that, if Turkey
were to make good on its threats of incursions into northern Iraq,
that would provoke a reaction of the part of the Kurds inside
Iraq. Not only: Kurds in Iran and Syria (as well as Turkey) could
join forces with their compatriots in Iraq, and strive to establish
their independent state, Kurdistan. This would be the realization of
a nightmare vision hatched by the 1916 British-French deal known as
the Sykes-Picot Treaty, which carved up the Ottoman Empire among the
imperial powers in the aftermath of World War I. The ethnic Kurdish
population, dispersed among the regions to become newly defined
"states" of Syria, Iran, Iraq and Turkey, would come together in
an entity, whose emergence would challenge the very existence of
those states.
The Founding Fathers of Kurdistan
If Sykes-Picot were the result of a rotten deal between imperial
France and Britain, the threat of a Kurdish entity in the region today
must be chalked up to imperial-thinking factions in Britain and the
United States. It is now an open secret, which the Bush crowd thought
it had been able to keep under wraps, that W. and his crew have been
long-term sponsors of the PKK, and worshipped as such by the terrorist
group itself. On October 30, the {International Herald Tribune} ran an
article reporting on the fact that supplies for the group are allowed
to pass through a government checkpoint in Raniya. Former American
Ambassador to Turkey Mark Parris was quoted saying, "That couldn't
have happened without their permitting them to be there. That's their
turf. It's as simple as that." The IHT piece went on to report how the
PKK-linked Kurdistan Democratic Solution Party (KDSP), which operates
freely in Raniya and Sulaimaniya, has a leader, Fayik Muhamed Ahmad
Golpi, who is an outsp oken fan of George W. Bush. After the 2004 US
elections, Golpi sent W. a letter, congratulating him and wishing him
luck in his plans for transforming the Middle East. The IHT article
also noted the role of the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK),
the branch of the group seeking independence from Iran.
Turkey has long accused the US of supporting the PKK and allied
Kurdish separatists, on the obvious grounds that the terrorist group
has lived and flourished under American occupation in Iraq. It is a
well-documented fact that, since the 1991 Desert Storm war against
Iraq, the US had set up the notorious "no fly-zones" in the north
(and south), which provided air cover to the Kurds (and the PKK). On
July 20 of this year, then-Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul reported on
Turkish television, that PKK terrorists had been arrested in possession
of weapons manufactured in the US. Gul said, "US officials told us
those were the weapons they handed over to the Iraqi army.
1,260 weapons captured from the PKK," he said, "are American made. We
documented it to the US." According to the {New York Times} in August,
US Defense Department officials confirmed that weapons provided by the
US to Iraqi military and police trainees in 2004 and 2005 had indeed
ended up in the hands of the Kurds. On October 28, Iranian Foreign
Minister Manouchehr Mottaki joined with his Turkish counterpart,
Ali Babcan, in a press conference, to denounce the foreign sponsors
of the Kurdish groups threatening to detonate an explosion in the
region. Mottaki cited the PKK, the PJAK (or PEJAK) and the MEK/MKO
(Mujahideen e-Khalq), an Iranian terrorist group operating also from
Iraqi soil against the Islamic Republic.
In November 2006, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh had reported
to the {New Yorker} that "In the past six months, Israel and the United
States have been working together in support of a Kurdish resistance
group known as the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan. The group has
also been conducting clandestine cross-border forays into Iran."
Ankara: US, Iraq Must Rein PKK In
The Turks have rightly demanded that the US, as the occupying power
in northern Iraq, take action to curb the PKK, and have asked the
allegedly sovereign Iraqi government to do the same. They have
also stated that the KRG, led by Massoud Barzani, has protected the
PKK. Erdogan was quoted by {Hurriyet} as saying outright, "[Barzani]
is in a position of aiding and abetting the terrorist organization in
that region." For his part, Barzani has repeatedly refused to hand
over PKK elements to Turkey, "no matter what the cost." Orders to
the KRG to close all PKK offices have been cheerfully ignored.
However, as it became evident in late October, that the Turks would
make good on their threats to send some of the 100,000 troops they
had amassed on the border, into northern Iraq, to seek out and kill
PKK terrorists, the Iraqi Kurdish authorities changed their tune. One
reason is that Turkey made good on its threat to impose economic
sanctions on northern Iraq. Flights between Istanbul and Irbil were
stopped beginning November. As reported by {BBC}, Turkish Deputy
Prime Minister Cemil Cicek said after a cabinet meeting October 31,
that they had started "military, political and diplomatic measures"
against the PKK. "The targets of these measures are the terrorist
organization and those groups which are supporting, aiding and
abetting it," he said. Though no details were released, the measures
could entail a boycott of the Kurdistan Regional Government. This
could mean a cutoff of food imports, electricity supplies, and other
imports. Iraqi Foreign Minister Zebari announced a t the same time,
that checkpoints were being set up on the Turkish-Iraqi border to
cut off the PKK supply lines.
Not surprisingly, the PKK began to cry uncle. Falah Mustafa Bakir,
the head of foreign relations for the KRG, said November 2, that
he hoped Turkey would "reconsider its position and work for a
peaceful solution." He claimed the KRG did not support PKK terrorist
activity. On November 2, it was reported that a PKK leader, Abdul
Rahman al-Chadirchi, was calling on Turkey to present a peace plan
to overcome the crisis. This came after Turkish troops had succeeded
in hunting down and killing dozens of PKK elements in Turkey.
Whether or not Turkey will move militarily into northern Iraq, will
be decided officially, only following talks that Prime Minister
Erdogan will hold with President Bush in Washington on November
5. Statements made by Rice, as well as US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan
Crocker, on November 2, stressed Washington's desire that the Turks
desist from any such military cross-border incursions. Ankara, however,
has argued: if the US waged war on Afghanistan and invaded Iraq, on
grounds that elements from those distant countries had been involved
in terror attacks against the US, why should Turkey not do the same in
a country on its borders? Speaking at a parliamentary group meeting
of his Justice and Development Party (AKP) at the end of October,
Erdogan said that he would ask President Bush to "clearly define
[the US] road map" to deal with the PKK. He said it was a "test of
sincerity, and that if the US failed to act, "we will do our own job"
i.e. invade Iraq and mop up the PKK.
Regional Peace Efforts
The dangers inherent in a Turkish military incursion across Iraq's
borders, are best appreciated by Turkey's immediate neighbors, Iran,
Syria and Iraq itself. These three countries host Kurdish minorities
who could be catapulted, by a Turkish attack, into a military campaign
to establish an independent Kurdistan, thus detabilizing all three
nations. It is for this reason, that the three have taken steps
to defuse the crisis before it blows up. In a coordinated effort,
Syria and Iran have been consulting to eliminate the PKK threat,
preferably without Turkish military action inside Iraq.
On October 28, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan was in Tehran to
discuss his country's option of invading Iraq to pursue the PKK. The
Iranians told him they did {not} support such a military move. This
was an important move, since Tehran had earlier supported Turkey's
military moves, and even participated in joint attacks against the
Kurdish terrorists. On October 29, Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr
Mottaki visited Damascus for talks with President Bashar al-Assad,
and his counterpart Walid Muallem. The latter stated after the talks,
"The Iranians have initiated efforts which complement those of Syria,
because we want to give a political solution a chance." Mottaki
was quoted by the {Turkish Daily News} saying, "The PKK terrorists
threaten not only Turkey but also Iran and Syria," and added, "The
terrorist operations from the north of Iraq create a destabilizing
effect throughout the region." Mottaki went on to Baghdad, for
talks there A meeting was held in Istanbul November 2-3, of the
foriegn ministers of the region, and included all Iraq's neighbors,
plus the permanent members of the UN Security Council, and some G8
members. It is in this context that Condi Rice travelled to Turkey. As
of this writing, the meeting is taking place, and no results have been
announced yet. However, it was expected that Iran could play a major
role. Mottaki had announced that Iran would present a plan to solve
the c risis. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, after meeting with
Mottaki in Baghdad October 31, "urged Iran to help defuse the border
crisis between Turkey and the PKK and to give its entire support at
the Istanbul conference," according to a statement from his office,
reported by {Tehran Times}. At the same time, Iraqi Foreign Minister
Zebari said he and Mottaki agreed that the conference should not be
"highjacked" by this issue, and should address Iraq's security overall.
Significantlz, Zebari also called on the US and Iran to continue the
tripartite (Iran, Iraq, US) talks which had taken place in Baghdad at
the ambassadorial level. Mottaki, according to a report in the Lebanese
paper {Daily Star}, said the reported "readiness of the Americans for
a new round of talks" was something Iran did "consider positively." It
was in this congtext that Mottaki announced that Iran would "deliver
a plan regarding the situation in Iraq," at the Istanbul meeting.
This would be key, since the US is the occupying power and chief ally
of the Kurds. If the Kurdish terrorist threat is to be eliminated
and therefore a Turkish military move prevented, the US must shift
gears and move credibly against the PKK. Thus far, the US has merely
claimed it is "sharing intelligence" with Ankara. On November 1,
Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morell was quoted by the IHT saying,
"The key for any sort of military response, by the Turks or anybody
else, is actionable intelligence. We are making efforts to help them
get actionable intelligence." But such claims lack credibility, given
past performance. As Erdogan complained in an interview to the {Times}
of London on October 22, a "trilateral mechanism" had been set up
among the US, Iraq and Turkey to deal with the problem, but it "yielded
absolutely no results." Essentially the same point was made by former
NATO supreme commander in Europe Ralston, who said on October 29, that
a diplomatic effort which h e had led, to stop the terrorist PKK, had
failed. During his one-year tenure functioning as special envoy on the
PKK issue, Ralston had tried to set up such a tripartitie mechanism,
but failed, and this prompted his resignation. Iranian sources have
told me that intelligence Tehran had supplied to Baghdad, on the PKK
(presumably "actionable") had been welcomed, but that the Iraqis had
been prevented by the US from acting on it.
Thus, the key to defusing the Kurdish crisis, which threatens to blow
up the entire region, lies in Washington, and in US willingness to
cooperate with Iran, the regional power with considerable influence
in Iraq as well as Turkey. The simmering Kurdish crisis, therefore, is
putting the neocon cabal in Washington on the spot. It cannot have its
cake and eat it too. It cannot maintain the PKK and the entire Kurdish
separatist apparatus as an asset, and at the same time ask Turkey to
continue its role as a regional ally. It cannot pretend that Iraq
be stabilized, and at the same time demonize and threaten military
action against Iran, the key regional power capable of contibuting
to stability. In Washington, the chickens have come home to roost.
************* Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are
the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect
those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title
are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be
displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print
or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:
[email protected]
www.globalresearch.c a contains copyrighted material the use of
which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the
provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding
of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you
wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use"
you must request permission from the copyright owner.
by Muriel Mirak-Weissbach
Global Research
Tuesday, 6 November 2007, 11:24 am
When Secretary of State Condi Rice descended the stairs of her plane
in Ankara on November 2, she must have been thanking her lucking stars
that her security detail was shielding her from the massive groups
of Turkish demonstrators, who were wielding aggressive signs, some
showing her face as the backdrop for a target practicer's bulls-eye,
and others saying, "Terrorist Condi: Hands Off Turkey." Condi may
have been spared the embarrassment, but the signs and pickets were
prominently shown on international television news stations. And public
opinion polls reported that the popularity of the US among the Turks
is about as low as that of the US Congress among American voters.
The reason for the rising tide of anti-Americanism in Turkey is simple:
Washington is seen as the sponsor of the Kurdish terrorists who have
been killing Turkish soldiers, from their safe haven in US-occupied
northern Iraq.
Turkey is a long-term US ally and staunch NATO member, whose Incirlik
military base has functioned as a vital launching pad for US operations
into Afghanistan and Iraq. Thanks to the insanity emanating from
the Bush-Cheney cabal in Washington, this crucial regional ally has
turned into not only a leading critic of their botched Iraq policy,
but potentially also a "break-away ally" who will challenge the US
in the region, in pursuit of aims it rightly defines as in its own
vital national self-interest.
"Kurdistan"
The name of the game is "Kurdistan." Since the terrorist Kurdish
Workers Party, known as the PKK, has recently initiated a new wave
of attacks against Turkish targets, killing dozens of soldiers in
southeastern Turkey and abducting others, the conflict between the
Kurdish insurgents, who aim at establishing an independent "Kurdistan"
in a region overlapping Turkey, Iran and Syria, on the one hand, and
the sovereign Turkish nation, on the other, has reached such a point
that memories of the tragic 23-year-long struggle and its 30,000 dead,
have been vividly awakened. No one in Turkey wants that deadly process
to be repeated.
This time around, however, the conflict takes on a strategic dimension:
it is not "only" Turkey vs. a domestic insurgent force--the PKK--, but,
potentially, a new conflict in Southwest Asia as a whole, vectored
on war-torn Iraq. For, the PKK, which has recently raised its ugly
head again, is operating not out of Turkey, but out of northern Iraq,
in what is known as the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG). And this
region, which enjoys relative autonomy, is under the control of the
United States, the occupying power. Thus, since the PKK renewed its
terrorist attacks against Turkish military targets, {from inside Iraq},
the government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the military establishment,
have demanded that the US intervene to disarm the PKK, apprehend its
leading figures and extradite them to Turkey.
Paying demonstrative lip service to the fable that the Iraqi government
be "sovereign," Ankara has also pressed the government of Nouri
al-Maliki to move against the PKK.
The crisis reached an initial climax in mid-October, when, following
PKK killings of Turkish troops, the Turkish parliament voted to approve
a government plan to organize cross-border incursions into northern
Iraq, in hot pursuit of the terrorists. Impetus for the vote had been
provided by passage of a resolution in the US House Foreign Relations
Committee, on October 10, which acknowledged the 1915 massacres of
Armenians in Turkey as "genocide." Turkey saw the committee vote
as an affront, as demonstrating an "irresponsible attitude" which
could jeopardize US-Turkish relations, and responded by recalling its
ambassador from Washington. Furthermore, it was mooted that Turkey
could close the vital Incirlik base to US operations.
After another 17 Turkish soldiers were killed by PKK terrorists on
October 21, the Turkish cabinet went into emergency session. Prime
Minister Erdogan, under tremendous domestic pressure to move against
the threat, told the London {Times} on October 22, that his country
would move to smash the PKK in northern Iraq. "The target of this
operation," he explained, "is definitely not Iraq's territorial
integrity or its political unity. The target of this operation is the
terror organization based in the north of Iraq" which "must be driven
out ... its training camps ... dismantled and its leaders ... handed
over." Erdogan minced no words regarding the US reponsibility. "In
northern Iraq," he said, "we feel that both the terrorist organization
and the [Kurdish regional] administration there are sheltering behind
America." He went on to speak about a "trilateral mechanism" which
had been discussed, among the US, Iraq and Turkey to deal with the
problem, but lamented that it had led nowhere.
The decision by the Turkish parliament to approve cross-border
incursions into northern Iraq, sounded an alarm bell in Washington. The
well-grounded fear among government officials was that, if Turkey
were to make good on its threats of incursions into northern Iraq,
that would provoke a reaction of the part of the Kurds inside
Iraq. Not only: Kurds in Iran and Syria (as well as Turkey) could
join forces with their compatriots in Iraq, and strive to establish
their independent state, Kurdistan. This would be the realization of
a nightmare vision hatched by the 1916 British-French deal known as
the Sykes-Picot Treaty, which carved up the Ottoman Empire among the
imperial powers in the aftermath of World War I. The ethnic Kurdish
population, dispersed among the regions to become newly defined
"states" of Syria, Iran, Iraq and Turkey, would come together in
an entity, whose emergence would challenge the very existence of
those states.
The Founding Fathers of Kurdistan
If Sykes-Picot were the result of a rotten deal between imperial
France and Britain, the threat of a Kurdish entity in the region today
must be chalked up to imperial-thinking factions in Britain and the
United States. It is now an open secret, which the Bush crowd thought
it had been able to keep under wraps, that W. and his crew have been
long-term sponsors of the PKK, and worshipped as such by the terrorist
group itself. On October 30, the {International Herald Tribune} ran an
article reporting on the fact that supplies for the group are allowed
to pass through a government checkpoint in Raniya. Former American
Ambassador to Turkey Mark Parris was quoted saying, "That couldn't
have happened without their permitting them to be there. That's their
turf. It's as simple as that." The IHT piece went on to report how the
PKK-linked Kurdistan Democratic Solution Party (KDSP), which operates
freely in Raniya and Sulaimaniya, has a leader, Fayik Muhamed Ahmad
Golpi, who is an outsp oken fan of George W. Bush. After the 2004 US
elections, Golpi sent W. a letter, congratulating him and wishing him
luck in his plans for transforming the Middle East. The IHT article
also noted the role of the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK),
the branch of the group seeking independence from Iran.
Turkey has long accused the US of supporting the PKK and allied
Kurdish separatists, on the obvious grounds that the terrorist group
has lived and flourished under American occupation in Iraq. It is a
well-documented fact that, since the 1991 Desert Storm war against
Iraq, the US had set up the notorious "no fly-zones" in the north
(and south), which provided air cover to the Kurds (and the PKK). On
July 20 of this year, then-Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul reported on
Turkish television, that PKK terrorists had been arrested in possession
of weapons manufactured in the US. Gul said, "US officials told us
those were the weapons they handed over to the Iraqi army.
1,260 weapons captured from the PKK," he said, "are American made. We
documented it to the US." According to the {New York Times} in August,
US Defense Department officials confirmed that weapons provided by the
US to Iraqi military and police trainees in 2004 and 2005 had indeed
ended up in the hands of the Kurds. On October 28, Iranian Foreign
Minister Manouchehr Mottaki joined with his Turkish counterpart,
Ali Babcan, in a press conference, to denounce the foreign sponsors
of the Kurdish groups threatening to detonate an explosion in the
region. Mottaki cited the PKK, the PJAK (or PEJAK) and the MEK/MKO
(Mujahideen e-Khalq), an Iranian terrorist group operating also from
Iraqi soil against the Islamic Republic.
In November 2006, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh had reported
to the {New Yorker} that "In the past six months, Israel and the United
States have been working together in support of a Kurdish resistance
group known as the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan. The group has
also been conducting clandestine cross-border forays into Iran."
Ankara: US, Iraq Must Rein PKK In
The Turks have rightly demanded that the US, as the occupying power
in northern Iraq, take action to curb the PKK, and have asked the
allegedly sovereign Iraqi government to do the same. They have
also stated that the KRG, led by Massoud Barzani, has protected the
PKK. Erdogan was quoted by {Hurriyet} as saying outright, "[Barzani]
is in a position of aiding and abetting the terrorist organization in
that region." For his part, Barzani has repeatedly refused to hand
over PKK elements to Turkey, "no matter what the cost." Orders to
the KRG to close all PKK offices have been cheerfully ignored.
However, as it became evident in late October, that the Turks would
make good on their threats to send some of the 100,000 troops they
had amassed on the border, into northern Iraq, to seek out and kill
PKK terrorists, the Iraqi Kurdish authorities changed their tune. One
reason is that Turkey made good on its threat to impose economic
sanctions on northern Iraq. Flights between Istanbul and Irbil were
stopped beginning November. As reported by {BBC}, Turkish Deputy
Prime Minister Cemil Cicek said after a cabinet meeting October 31,
that they had started "military, political and diplomatic measures"
against the PKK. "The targets of these measures are the terrorist
organization and those groups which are supporting, aiding and
abetting it," he said. Though no details were released, the measures
could entail a boycott of the Kurdistan Regional Government. This
could mean a cutoff of food imports, electricity supplies, and other
imports. Iraqi Foreign Minister Zebari announced a t the same time,
that checkpoints were being set up on the Turkish-Iraqi border to
cut off the PKK supply lines.
Not surprisingly, the PKK began to cry uncle. Falah Mustafa Bakir,
the head of foreign relations for the KRG, said November 2, that
he hoped Turkey would "reconsider its position and work for a
peaceful solution." He claimed the KRG did not support PKK terrorist
activity. On November 2, it was reported that a PKK leader, Abdul
Rahman al-Chadirchi, was calling on Turkey to present a peace plan
to overcome the crisis. This came after Turkish troops had succeeded
in hunting down and killing dozens of PKK elements in Turkey.
Whether or not Turkey will move militarily into northern Iraq, will
be decided officially, only following talks that Prime Minister
Erdogan will hold with President Bush in Washington on November
5. Statements made by Rice, as well as US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan
Crocker, on November 2, stressed Washington's desire that the Turks
desist from any such military cross-border incursions. Ankara, however,
has argued: if the US waged war on Afghanistan and invaded Iraq, on
grounds that elements from those distant countries had been involved
in terror attacks against the US, why should Turkey not do the same in
a country on its borders? Speaking at a parliamentary group meeting
of his Justice and Development Party (AKP) at the end of October,
Erdogan said that he would ask President Bush to "clearly define
[the US] road map" to deal with the PKK. He said it was a "test of
sincerity, and that if the US failed to act, "we will do our own job"
i.e. invade Iraq and mop up the PKK.
Regional Peace Efforts
The dangers inherent in a Turkish military incursion across Iraq's
borders, are best appreciated by Turkey's immediate neighbors, Iran,
Syria and Iraq itself. These three countries host Kurdish minorities
who could be catapulted, by a Turkish attack, into a military campaign
to establish an independent Kurdistan, thus detabilizing all three
nations. It is for this reason, that the three have taken steps
to defuse the crisis before it blows up. In a coordinated effort,
Syria and Iran have been consulting to eliminate the PKK threat,
preferably without Turkish military action inside Iraq.
On October 28, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan was in Tehran to
discuss his country's option of invading Iraq to pursue the PKK. The
Iranians told him they did {not} support such a military move. This
was an important move, since Tehran had earlier supported Turkey's
military moves, and even participated in joint attacks against the
Kurdish terrorists. On October 29, Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr
Mottaki visited Damascus for talks with President Bashar al-Assad,
and his counterpart Walid Muallem. The latter stated after the talks,
"The Iranians have initiated efforts which complement those of Syria,
because we want to give a political solution a chance." Mottaki
was quoted by the {Turkish Daily News} saying, "The PKK terrorists
threaten not only Turkey but also Iran and Syria," and added, "The
terrorist operations from the north of Iraq create a destabilizing
effect throughout the region." Mottaki went on to Baghdad, for
talks there A meeting was held in Istanbul November 2-3, of the
foriegn ministers of the region, and included all Iraq's neighbors,
plus the permanent members of the UN Security Council, and some G8
members. It is in this context that Condi Rice travelled to Turkey. As
of this writing, the meeting is taking place, and no results have been
announced yet. However, it was expected that Iran could play a major
role. Mottaki had announced that Iran would present a plan to solve
the c risis. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, after meeting with
Mottaki in Baghdad October 31, "urged Iran to help defuse the border
crisis between Turkey and the PKK and to give its entire support at
the Istanbul conference," according to a statement from his office,
reported by {Tehran Times}. At the same time, Iraqi Foreign Minister
Zebari said he and Mottaki agreed that the conference should not be
"highjacked" by this issue, and should address Iraq's security overall.
Significantlz, Zebari also called on the US and Iran to continue the
tripartite (Iran, Iraq, US) talks which had taken place in Baghdad at
the ambassadorial level. Mottaki, according to a report in the Lebanese
paper {Daily Star}, said the reported "readiness of the Americans for
a new round of talks" was something Iran did "consider positively." It
was in this congtext that Mottaki announced that Iran would "deliver
a plan regarding the situation in Iraq," at the Istanbul meeting.
This would be key, since the US is the occupying power and chief ally
of the Kurds. If the Kurdish terrorist threat is to be eliminated
and therefore a Turkish military move prevented, the US must shift
gears and move credibly against the PKK. Thus far, the US has merely
claimed it is "sharing intelligence" with Ankara. On November 1,
Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morell was quoted by the IHT saying,
"The key for any sort of military response, by the Turks or anybody
else, is actionable intelligence. We are making efforts to help them
get actionable intelligence." But such claims lack credibility, given
past performance. As Erdogan complained in an interview to the {Times}
of London on October 22, a "trilateral mechanism" had been set up
among the US, Iraq and Turkey to deal with the problem, but it "yielded
absolutely no results." Essentially the same point was made by former
NATO supreme commander in Europe Ralston, who said on October 29, that
a diplomatic effort which h e had led, to stop the terrorist PKK, had
failed. During his one-year tenure functioning as special envoy on the
PKK issue, Ralston had tried to set up such a tripartitie mechanism,
but failed, and this prompted his resignation. Iranian sources have
told me that intelligence Tehran had supplied to Baghdad, on the PKK
(presumably "actionable") had been welcomed, but that the Iraqis had
been prevented by the US from acting on it.
Thus, the key to defusing the Kurdish crisis, which threatens to blow
up the entire region, lies in Washington, and in US willingness to
cooperate with Iran, the regional power with considerable influence
in Iraq as well as Turkey. The simmering Kurdish crisis, therefore, is
putting the neocon cabal in Washington on the spot. It cannot have its
cake and eat it too. It cannot maintain the PKK and the entire Kurdish
separatist apparatus as an asset, and at the same time ask Turkey to
continue its role as a regional ally. It cannot pretend that Iraq
be stabilized, and at the same time demonize and threaten military
action against Iran, the key regional power capable of contibuting
to stability. In Washington, the chickens have come home to roost.
************* Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are
the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect
those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title
are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be
displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print
or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:
[email protected]
www.globalresearch.c a contains copyrighted material the use of
which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the
provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding
of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site
is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you
wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use"
you must request permission from the copyright owner.