Why Nato is deploying missiles in Turkey

Wang Hui,

China Daily December 9, 2012 1:00 am

Nato’s decision to accede to Turkey’s request that the alliance deploy Patriot missiles along the Turkish-Syrian border will have profound implications on the security scenario in the Middle East. Since there is no guarantee that Nato’s defensive measure will not be used against others, the move will complicate an already tricky situation and prevent the Syrian crisis from being resolved diplomatically.

Western countries have thrown their weight behind Syrian rebels, providing them with support during the 21-month Syrian crisis. Nato officials have until now ruled out military intervention in Syria mainly because member states are wary of consequences that would follow. In other words, Nato is not really opposed to a forcible regime change in Syria – like the one it brought about in Libya. It’s just waiting for an opportune moment.

Under such circumstances, the deployment of Patriot missiles along Turkey’s border could be seen as preparations for military intervention in Syria.

In his talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Tuesday, Nato secretary-general Anders Fogh Rasmussen tried to reassure Moscow that the Patriot missiles would not be used to impose a no-fly zone in Syria and instead were aimed at defending Turkey.

History tells us that any show of force in a strategically sensitive place cannot be a sign of goodwill. For one thing, Nato’s military manoeuvrings at the doorsteps of Syria could embolden the Syrian opposition forces to intensify their fight against government forces, which would only cause more bloodshed in the turbulent country.

Given Nato’s record, its pledges that the missile deployment is defensive in nature sound hollow. In March 2011, Nato usurped a UN resolution that mandated the implementation of a no-fly zone in Libya to launch airstrikes, which led to the fall of Mu’ammar Gadhafi. There is no guarantee that Nato would not use the Patriot missiles’ cover to do the same in Syria.

Moreover, Nato’s claim that the missiles are intended to defend Turkey against an attack from Syria does not sound convincing at all.

It’s true that in October, firing from inside the Syrian border triggered an exchange of shelling with Turkey, which is believed to have fuelled Ankara’s fears of the crisis spilling into Turkish land. But Turkey’s military is far superior to Syria’s, and it has the advantage of being home to an American military base. Turkey does not lack the resources to defend its borders.

So, what is Nato’s true intention then? A look at the timing of the hullabaloo around Syria’s chemical weapons issue may shed some light on the question.

Interestingly, while Nato was mulling Turkey’s proposal of missile deployment, news of Syria supposedly moving chemical weapons hit the papers. As Western leaders warned Syria of the consequences if it ever used the weapons, Nato accepted Turkey’s demand.

The fear of chemical weapons, though not for the first time, prompted Nato to play the moral card and agree to deploy the missiles.

With the chemical weapons issue continuing to brew, Nato could get another excuse to intervene in Syria in more indirect ways.

But Nato should stop assuming the vanguard’s role in the internal affairs of other countries, because trampling the UN Charter will only aggravate the crisis and plunge the region deeper into instability.

via Why Nato is deploying missiles in Turkey – The Nation.