Tweet
TURKEY CAN AND SHOULD ACT
Mideast Mirror
June 25, 2012 Monday
Ankara should not be afraid of a decisive military reaction to the
Syrian regime shooting down its warplane, says Abderrahman ar-Rashed
in Saudi Asharq al-Awsat
The weekend shooting down of a Turkish jet by Syrian air defense
systems may have brought a Turkish/Syrian confrontation closer,
maintains a veteran Saudi commentator. This is despite Turkey's
reluctance to go to war without securing international or NATO cover
for this.
CONSIDERABLE INTEREST: "The Turks are Syria's largest neighbors and
have considerable influence inside Syria itself, especially in its
Northern areas," writes 'Abderrahman ar-Rashed in the Saudi-owned
panEnhanced Coverage Linkingpan -Search using:Company ProfileNews,
Most Recent 60 Days-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat.
The Turks have gained some legitimacy for intervening in defense of
their interests. Their sovereignty has been violated by the Syrian
regime's forces many times. Nor should we forget that what is happening
in Syria is a threat to Turkey's security, whether the regime survives
or falls.
The Turks fears that Kurdish separatists will resume their activity
against them after they had succeeded in crushing them. This has cost
it over forty thousand people dead in past guerilla wars. It also fears
the terrorist groups that may fill the vacuum that the regime's fall
will create, just as it fears that if it manages to escape its fall,
the regime would conspire against it and seek revenge.
When Syrian defenses shot down a Turkish warplane on Friday, the
expectation was that Ankara would respond militarily, especially since
it had warned the regime that it would not remain silent in response
to the many acts of aggression committed by Syrian forces along the
Turkish borders. But Turkey also disappointed many people in this
regard, and had earlier also let them down when it verbally undertook
not to leave the Syrian people to be slaughtered without protection.
Turkey is a huge neighbor with vast military capabilities that render
it able to win any military confrontation. It will also find itself
welcome by the majority of the Syrian people as a savior from a
criminal regime that has not allowed a single day to pass without
killing tens of unarmed civilians.
What prevents Turkey from being like the U.S. when it saved France
from German Nazi occupation? Or what prevents it from doing for the
Syrians, what Saudi Arabia and the U.S. did when they forced Saddam's
occupying forces out of Kuwait? In fact, Turkish PM Erdogan can play
a similar role to that played by former U.S. president Bill Clinton
in saving Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo.
Turkey indeed gives the impression that it wants to intervene to
end the massacres and restrain the Assad regime. It also seems
afraid of action. But why is this so given that it has sufficient
military power and capability to allow it to score an easy victory
over the Assad regime easy, especially since the latter's forces are
exhausted and despised by the population? After all, as the former
[Greek] Cypriot PM said when asked about Cyprus armament program,
there is no point in having an armament program since Turkey has
enormous military power and can defeat us in a few hours.
The reason, I think, is that the Turks, who fought their last war alone
against the Greek Cypriots in August 1974 and quickly defeated them, do
not wish to be a party to any war unless fought under an international
flag. This continues to be impossible thanks to the Russian and
Chinese veto. Alternatively, the Turks would not be averse to a war
fought by NATO - the 'Libyan scenario' in other words. But NATO does
not seem to be interested in fighting the battle against Assad.
The Turks prefer to be a part of an international campaign. Turkey,
after all, is a major member of the NATO alliance. Its armed forces
are the second largest after the U.S. Its army has some 750 thousand
men in uniform.
The reason why the Turks have no appetite for fighting the Syrian
regime despite everything it has done to them, and despite the fact
that it has placed them in an awkward situation before regional public
opinion, may stem from the fact that Ankara is hoping for one of two
things: Either that the Assad regime will collapse because of the
ongoing revolution that has exhausted it; or that the international
community will reach a point where it would have had enough of the
regime's crimes and reach an agreement against it.
Once the latter happens, Turkey will act as the spearhead and will
enter Damascus under an international umbrella. But the second
alternative is unlikely because of the Russian position which is
totally biased in the Syrian regime's favor.
Turkey fears are well-known. Domestically, it fears that a war with
Syria would fling open the door to its secessionist or opposition
Kurdish and Armenian groups. It also fears that Iran would open a
front against it. But these pretexts are unconvincing because Turkey
is stronger than Iran, militarily and economically. Moreover, it will
secure NATO's backing. Furthermore, the Syrian regime is teetering
on the edge no matter how much its president seems to be holding
his ground.
In my opinion, Turkey, which has hesitated for long and remained silent
in response to the Syrian regime's insults and has disappointed many
people who thought it was ferocious lion, will reach a point where
it will have to intervene to protect its own interests.
"The difference is that, if it were to intervene now, it would win
enormous popular and moral backing from the Arabs and many other
societies that hate the Syrian regime's crimes," concludes Rashed.
Mideast Mirror
June 25, 2012 Monday
Ankara should not be afraid of a decisive military reaction to the
Syrian regime shooting down its warplane, says Abderrahman ar-Rashed
in Saudi Asharq al-Awsat
The weekend shooting down of a Turkish jet by Syrian air defense
systems may have brought a Turkish/Syrian confrontation closer,
maintains a veteran Saudi commentator. This is despite Turkey's
reluctance to go to war without securing international or NATO cover
for this.
CONSIDERABLE INTEREST: "The Turks are Syria's largest neighbors and
have considerable influence inside Syria itself, especially in its
Northern areas," writes 'Abderrahman ar-Rashed in the Saudi-owned
panEnhanced Coverage Linkingpan -Search using:Company ProfileNews,
Most Recent 60 Days-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat.
The Turks have gained some legitimacy for intervening in defense of
their interests. Their sovereignty has been violated by the Syrian
regime's forces many times. Nor should we forget that what is happening
in Syria is a threat to Turkey's security, whether the regime survives
or falls.
The Turks fears that Kurdish separatists will resume their activity
against them after they had succeeded in crushing them. This has cost
it over forty thousand people dead in past guerilla wars. It also fears
the terrorist groups that may fill the vacuum that the regime's fall
will create, just as it fears that if it manages to escape its fall,
the regime would conspire against it and seek revenge.
When Syrian defenses shot down a Turkish warplane on Friday, the
expectation was that Ankara would respond militarily, especially since
it had warned the regime that it would not remain silent in response
to the many acts of aggression committed by Syrian forces along the
Turkish borders. But Turkey also disappointed many people in this
regard, and had earlier also let them down when it verbally undertook
not to leave the Syrian people to be slaughtered without protection.
Turkey is a huge neighbor with vast military capabilities that render
it able to win any military confrontation. It will also find itself
welcome by the majority of the Syrian people as a savior from a
criminal regime that has not allowed a single day to pass without
killing tens of unarmed civilians.
What prevents Turkey from being like the U.S. when it saved France
from German Nazi occupation? Or what prevents it from doing for the
Syrians, what Saudi Arabia and the U.S. did when they forced Saddam's
occupying forces out of Kuwait? In fact, Turkish PM Erdogan can play
a similar role to that played by former U.S. president Bill Clinton
in saving Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo.
Turkey indeed gives the impression that it wants to intervene to
end the massacres and restrain the Assad regime. It also seems
afraid of action. But why is this so given that it has sufficient
military power and capability to allow it to score an easy victory
over the Assad regime easy, especially since the latter's forces are
exhausted and despised by the population? After all, as the former
[Greek] Cypriot PM said when asked about Cyprus armament program,
there is no point in having an armament program since Turkey has
enormous military power and can defeat us in a few hours.
The reason, I think, is that the Turks, who fought their last war alone
against the Greek Cypriots in August 1974 and quickly defeated them, do
not wish to be a party to any war unless fought under an international
flag. This continues to be impossible thanks to the Russian and
Chinese veto. Alternatively, the Turks would not be averse to a war
fought by NATO - the 'Libyan scenario' in other words. But NATO does
not seem to be interested in fighting the battle against Assad.
The Turks prefer to be a part of an international campaign. Turkey,
after all, is a major member of the NATO alliance. Its armed forces
are the second largest after the U.S. Its army has some 750 thousand
men in uniform.
The reason why the Turks have no appetite for fighting the Syrian
regime despite everything it has done to them, and despite the fact
that it has placed them in an awkward situation before regional public
opinion, may stem from the fact that Ankara is hoping for one of two
things: Either that the Assad regime will collapse because of the
ongoing revolution that has exhausted it; or that the international
community will reach a point where it would have had enough of the
regime's crimes and reach an agreement against it.
Once the latter happens, Turkey will act as the spearhead and will
enter Damascus under an international umbrella. But the second
alternative is unlikely because of the Russian position which is
totally biased in the Syrian regime's favor.
Turkey fears are well-known. Domestically, it fears that a war with
Syria would fling open the door to its secessionist or opposition
Kurdish and Armenian groups. It also fears that Iran would open a
front against it. But these pretexts are unconvincing because Turkey
is stronger than Iran, militarily and economically. Moreover, it will
secure NATO's backing. Furthermore, the Syrian regime is teetering
on the edge no matter how much its president seems to be holding
his ground.
In my opinion, Turkey, which has hesitated for long and remained silent
in response to the Syrian regime's insults and has disappointed many
people who thought it was ferocious lion, will reach a point where
it will have to intervene to protect its own interests.
"The difference is that, if it were to intervene now, it would win
enormous popular and moral backing from the Arabs and many other
societies that hate the Syrian regime's crimes," concludes Rashed.