Category: EU Members

European Council decided to open accession negotiations with Turkey on 17 Dec. 2004

  • (ECO) ISTANBUL IS A BRIDGE BETWEEN CIVILIZATIONS, ERDOGAN

    (ECO) ISTANBUL IS A BRIDGE BETWEEN CIVILIZATIONS, ERDOGAN

    ETurkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Tuesday Istanbul was a bridge not only between continents but also between civilizations, cultures, economies and commercial regions.Speaking at the inauguration of the annual meetings of IMF and World Bank in Istanbul, Erdogan said that he welcomed all to Turkey and Istanbul with warm regards. Turkey and Istanbul hosted the annual meetings of IMF and World Bank in
    1955. Turkey hosts the meetings again after 54 years. I would like to express the happiness of my people and myself over welcoming you, the distinguished guests, to Istanbul one more time, Erdogan said.
    I hope that the meetings in Istanbul would be beneficial at a time when we
    are going through a critical process as far as global economy is concerned,
    Erdogan underlined. You are now on lands that invented the first currency in history. I would like to use this opportunity to remind you that you are also in a city that spreads on two continents, Erdogan said. The Bosphorus Strait connects Asia to Europe. I am confident that the city
    of Istanbul, a city which unites civilizations, cultures and economies, will be
    the host for a meeting that will leave a mark on the global economy and will help us bring together our strengths and experiences, Erdogan said.Erdogan stressed that strong policy measures have yielded positive results
    in the world. This is a pleasing development. However, we must not let go precautions in our economies, Erdogan said.There is a need to re-evaluate the distribution of roles and responsibilities in the global economy, Erdogan noted.
    I, once again, want to welcome you all to Turkey and Istanbul and hope that
    you will enjoy the beauties of an unique city Istanbul, Erdogan also said.

    AA

  • Turkey rides on Irish ‘yes’ to promote EU entry

    Turkey rides on Irish ‘yes’ to promote EU entry

    Published: Monday 5 October 2009   

    Ahmet Davutoglu, Turkey’s foreign minister, said an Irish ‘yes’ to the Lisbon Treaty would create the legal conditions for future EU enlargements and pleaded passionately for his country’s accession to the Union.

    Turkey can help Europe to become a major player on the international stage if Turkey is admitted to the club, Davutoglu said. He further insisted that his country was not making these efforts “for PR” reasons, but to help the EU.

    Davutoglu, a professor and political scientist, was speaking in Brussels on Friday (2 October), as Irish voters were being called to the ballot box for a second time to decide on the Lisbon Treaty.

    There, he met with European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn, and Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt in his capacity as representative of the rotating EU presidency.

    The Turkish diplomat said his country was a key regional player and was already playing the role of “honest broker” in a number of conflicts in which EU countries have little leverage. 

    Davutoglu gave many examples of Turkey’s mediator role in conflicts in the Middle East, the Caucasus or during ongoing tensions over Iran’s nuclear programme. He said his country was pursuing a policy of “zero problems” with its neighbours, with all of whom he said relations were “very good”.

    Asked by journalists about his country’s relations with Greece, where a number of bilateral problems persist (EurActiv 28/08/09EurActiv 03/07/09), Davutoglu explained that there were “of course difficulties”. But he said there was a big difference compared to the situation 10-15 years ago, because problems were now being dealt with constructively “without escalating tensions”. He even called Turkish-Greek relations “excellent”.

    On Cyprus, Davutoglu accused the Greek Cypriot side of not being constructive in ongoing reunification talks held under UN patronage (EurActiv 30/09/09). Among other things, he blamed the president of Cyprus, Dimitris Christofias, for having declined a meeting in New York in trilateral format, with Turkish Cypriot negotiator Mehmet Ali Talat and a Turkish delegation. He said that for the Greek Cypriots, Turkish Cypriots were “semi-human beings,” while Greek Cypriots were “super human beings”.

  • Turkey’s EU Membership: Will the ‘Armenian Opening’ Help?

    Turkey’s EU Membership: Will the ‘Armenian Opening’ Help?

    Caucasus Update No. 49, October 5, 2009

    Caucasian Review of International Affairs

    )

    Turkey’s foreign policy, as emphasised by Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, is to have ‘zero problems with neighbours’ (Today’s Zaman, September 13). This is, first and foremost, intended to stabilise Turkey’s complex regional environment and ensure Turkey’s reputation as a peacemaker. It is also, more tactically, intended to boost Turkey’s long-running EU membership application. Ankara hopes to show that it is a responsible, and indeed indispensable, partner for Europe in Eurasia and the Middle East.
    The rapprochement with Armenia, which seems to be gathering pace, is sometimes interpreted in this light. Turkey’s chief EU negotiator, Egemen Bağış, stated in early September that he expected the ‘Armenian opening’ to help Turkey’s EU bid (Today’s Zaman, September 2). However, this view is rather optimistic. In reality, normalization of relations with Armenia will have a marginal effect on Turkey’s EU application, at best.

     

    In truth, the EU has never been particularly concerned about the closed border between Armenia and Turkey. European policy towards the South Caucasus as a whole has been patchy and vague. It took the war in Georgia for the EU to take an active stance, and in truth this was mainly the product of Nicolas Sarkozy’s energetic diplomacy as EU President, rather than any institutional determination on behalf of the whole Union.

     

    The EU Monitoring Mission now keeping the peace between Georgia and Russia is welcome: however, as the Caucasus Update has argued before, the lack of subsequent hostilities is due to Russia’s lack of interest in a new conflict, not the EU’s efforts (Caucasus Update, March 16).

     

    The EU has been less concerned about the Turkish-Armenian confrontation and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Europe has let the OSCE take the lead on Karabakh, and has been content to sit back and express its support for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. There is little appetite within Brussels, for instance, for an EU peacekeeping force to be deployed in such a tense environment.

     

    However, the EU still has an interest in preventing major conflicts in the ‘wider European space’. The cold war between Turkey and Armenia does not pose this risk. Although Turkish troops might intervene in the event of a new Karabakh war, they did not do so in the early 1990s, partly out of a desire to maintain a semblance of a balanced policy towards the conflict. Ankara, now more than ever, values its role as a peacemaker. Military intervention would destroy that reputation and cripple Turkey’s EU accession hopes.

     

    Without a risk of war, it is clear that the thaw between Armenia and Turkey is hardly at the top of the EU’s list of priorities. Brussels already has evidence of Turkey’s good intentions as a regional mediator: it is currently negotiating between Iraq and Syria (BBC, August 31), has been intermittently involved in the Israel-Palestine peace process, and has also been quietly acting as a bridge between the West and Iran. Although welcome, opening the border with Armenia would not be a ‘game-changer’ in Turkey’s relationship with the EU.

     

    Indeed, the two biggest game-changers in Ankara’s membership talks are Cyprus and the ‘Kurdish question’. Cyprus is, superficially, similar to the Armenian issue – an inter-state dispute with deep roots, which currently hinges on a closed border and diplomatic recognition. Unlike the Armenian issue, Cyprus is an EU member. Consequently, the dispute with Cyprus is the biggest single stumbling block in Turkey’s EU application.

     

    Clearly it is not the only issue – there are 35 ‘chapters’ on which Ankara must satisfy Brussels, and only one (science and research) has been completed. But Cyprus’ significance is such that, when Turkey failed to apply a 2005 protocol on free movement of goods and people to the Cypriot government, the EU insisted that no ‘chapters’ could be closed, and that several would not be discussed until it had applied the protocol. The stakes are hardly as high in the Armenian thaw.

     

    The Kurdish question is less significant than Cyprus, but more so than Armenia. The EU is reluctant to move forward on membership talks with a state which still – despite much recent progress – faces a serious ethnic insurgency. Until Ankara can, in the eyes of Brussels, get its house in order and negotiate a peaceful settlement with its Kurdish population, it will continue to be viewed as an irresponsible and unsuitable candidate for membership by some within Brussels.

     

    It is instructive to look at the question in reverse. If, for instance, Turkey had resolved Cyprus and the Kurdish question, but had failed to make headway on opening the Armenian border, would this impede its membership process? It is unlikely.

     

    Indeed, the only EU members which would be likely to turn the Armenian issue into an obstacle would be those – notably France – which already oppose Turkish accession.  Most pragmatists in Brussels would probably be willing to move on, and urge Ankara towards an open border whilst continuing the membership negotiations.

     

    It would be wrong to think that the EU does not value the thaw between Turkey and Armenia. It does improve Turkey’s reputation. But that reputation is already high, for more important reasons. And it is not the lack of an open border with Armenia – which the EU has little interest in – which is blocking Ankara’s accession to the Union. Until Cyprus and the Kurdish question are resolved, whether or not the Armenian border is open will be a minor footnote in Turkey’s relationship with Brussels.

     

    Caucasian Review of International Affairs

    Eppsteiner str 2, 60323 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
    Tel: +49 69 138 76 684
    E-mail: [email protected]
    Web: www.cria-online.org

  • Violent Protests In Paris Greet Armenian President

    Violent Protests In Paris Greet Armenian President

    0D62E38F 158F 424D 8A9D 5D0F4B926D4A w393 s

    France — Eiffel Tower, Paris in lights, 28Mar2009

    02.10.2009

    (AP) – Violent protests broke out Friday at the start of Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian’s tour of Armenian communities worldwide, with demonstrators in Paris shouting “traitor!” at him and decrying his plans to establish ties with Turkey.

       

    Sarkisian embarked on the tour – which will also take him to the United States, Russia and Lebanon – to seek support for his landmark bid for diplomatic ties with Turkey after a century of enmity. But at least 200 protesters from the Armenian Diaspora in France showed up at a public appearance in Paris.

       

    Riot police fought back belligerent demonstrators, a few dozen of whom shouted “No!” and punched riot shields. Police dragged several protesters away kicking and screaming. Sarkisian later put in a brief appearance, walking past protesters shouting through bullhorns.

       

    The killing of up to 1.5 million Armenians under the Ottoman Empire has been the main barrier to reconciliation with Turkey. Armenians have long fought to persuade other governments to consider it a genocide. Turkey rejects the label and says the death toll is inflated.

       

    The scuffles Friday erupted at a memorial event at a monument to an Armenian priest and composer targeted in the massacres. Earlier in the day, Sarkisian had lunch in Paris with crooner Charles Aznavour, one of France’s most famous Armenians, before meeting with members of the vocal Armenian community here, Sarkisian’s spokesman Samvel Farmanian said.

       

    After Paris, Sarkisian is set to continue what is dubbed a “pan-Armenian tour” with visits to New York, Los Angeles, Beirut and Rostov-on-Don in Russia to discuss a planned meeting Oct. 10 when the Turkish and Armenian foreign ministers are expected to sign the deal to establish ties.

       

    Armenians abroad – estimated at 5.7 million – outnumber the 3.2 million living in Armenia itself, the smallest of the ex-Soviet republics. The largest communities are in Russia (2 million), the United States (1.4 million), Georgia (460,000) and France (450,000), according to government data.

  • Erdoğan warns world about KKTC’s future status

    Erdoğan warns world about KKTC’s future status

    Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan sits next to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev at a meeting of the United Nations Security Council at UN headquarters.

    Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has warned the international community that the status of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) as an independent state will have to be acknowledged if the ongoing talks to reunite the island fail, signaling that his government might revise its pro-reunification stance in effect since it first came to power in 2002.

    “It must be understood that negotiations cannot last forever, the present window of opportunity cannot stay open forever and there is an absolute need to make the process successful,” Erdoğan said on Thursday at the UN’s 64th General Assembly.

    By “process,” Erdoğan was referring to a revived peace process between the island’s Greek and Turkish Cypriots, who have lived divided since 1974, when Turkey militarily intervened in the north of the island in response to a Greek-inspired coup.

    Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat and Greek Cypriot leader Dimitris Christofias broke a four-year stalemate on talks in March 2008 and have been engaged in face-to-face negotiations with the goal of reunifying the island. Previous reunification efforts on Cyprus collapsed in 2004, when Greek Cypriots rejected a settlement blueprint drafted by former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and accepted by Turkish Cypriots.

    ‘If a solution cannot be reached because of the Greek 
    side's rejection then normalizing the status of the Turkish 
    Republic of Northern Cyprus in the global arena will be a 
    must that can no longer be delayed’

    Erdoğan said a comprehensive settlement can be achieved if the parties are constructive. “If not, the UN secretary-general should step in as in 2004. We are aiming for a referendum in the spring of 2010 at the latest. But if a solution cannot be reached because of the Greek side’s rejection, as in 2004, then normalizing the status of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in the international arena will be a must that can no longer be delayed,” Erdoğan added.

    According to sources at the Turkish Foreign Ministry, Prime Minister Erdoğan reminded the world community at the UN that Turkey has a Plan B. “Turkey will be engaged in efforts to provide recognition for the KKTC if the Greek side rejects a proposed solution,” the source said.

    The Turkish side often reiterates that there is a serious inequality in negotiations because Turkish Cypriots are isolated in every sphere and are unable to even play an international soccer match while Greek Cypriots comfortably enjoy international recognition and EU membership. In addition, Turkey’s entry into the European Union partly hinges on a peace deal in Cyprus, whose Greek Cypriot population represents the island in the EU.

    Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan attended the G-20 meeting in the US city of Pittsburg with his wife, Emine. The two posed for a photo with US President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, ahead of the meeting.
    Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan attended the G-20 meeting in the US city of Pittsburg with his wife, Emine. The two posed for a photo with US President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, ahead of the meeting.

    “Turkish Cypriots are still faced with unjust isolation. It is not right to expect the Turkish Cypriot party to pay the cost of deadlock,” Erdoğan also said. “What the prime minister has voiced at the UN is not new, but his words make the case stronger that Turkey will make an effort for the KKTC’s recognition if all other efforts fail to reunify the island,” said Özdem Sanberk, a former foreign ministry undersecretary and a foreign policy analyst.

    “The prime minister’s words should not be perceived as a threat. We are saying that we are ready for a solution similar to the Annan plan, but if it is rejected by the Greek side, there is no escape from a de facto KKTC state,” Sanberk told Today’s Zaman. “The Greek side should understand this message in the right way.”

    But he added that the problem is that the status quo is not bothersome for the Greek side because they are already in the EU.

    “If Turkey starts diplomatic efforts for the recognition of the KKTC, the Greek side will then start to act, and a war of attrition is likely. So the prime minister’s words reveal a hidden threat,” Sanberk said. Observers agree that the window of opportunity is small for a solution in Cyprus and that it could start to close in late 2009 as preparations begin for Turkish Cypriot parliamentary and presidential elections in February and April 2010, respectively.

    Former diplomat Temel İskit evaluated the situation as “the last chance.” “Conditions are ripe, but on both sides there are people who do not want a solution,” he told Today’s Zaman.

    “If the result of a referendum shows that the Greek side is rejecting a solution, then the Greek side will be seen as responsible for non-settlement,” he said. “And so the prime minister is warning about what could happen in such a situation.”

    Meanwhile, the KKTC’s Talat told reporters on Thursday in New York that the international community has an important role in finding a solution to the Cyprus problem. He added that the KKTC is working in close cooperation with Turkey for a solution in Cyprus and that Prime Minister Erdoğan’s words were “beneficial and meaningful.”

    Asked when he would meet with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Talat said a specific date was not yet set but that they would meet in the coming days. He said he had meetings with British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs David Miliband and Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt.

    Talat also said he wanted to meet with Christofias in New York but did not want to have an official meeting with him. Talat is expected to meet with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu as well as officials from Turkey’s permanent representation at the UN.

    ‘Turkish-Armenian relations at new level’

    Addressing the UN General Assembly, Erdoğan said Turkey is an element of peace and stability in its region.

    “Problems in our region have global consequences. Therefore, our constructive and conciliatory policy in the region contributes to global peace as well,” he said and added that the ongoing dialogue process between Turkey and Greece was a concrete example of such an approach and that efforts aiming at the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations were yielding fruitful results.

    Erdoğan, speaking at Princeton University on Thursday, said Turkish-Armenian relations have reached a new level through Swiss mediation. “I believe agreements we have initialed could be submitted to Parliament if political biases and concerns do not get in the way,” he said, adding that the government can possibly bring the issue to Parliament by Oct. 10 or 11.

    Meanwhile, the Armenian and Turkish presidents will be meeting in Switzerland on Oct. 10 to sign the two diplomatic protocols, which are then to be submitted to the Turkish and Armenian parliaments, as sources revealed the current Turkish-Armenian diplomatic plan.

    ‘World should fulfill its promises to the Gazans’

    In his address to the UN General Assembly, Erdoğan said Turkey expects countries of the region to share the same vision for peace, security and stability.

    Stressing the importance of Iraq’s territorial integrity, political unity and domestic peace, he said that Turkey attached great importance to the establishment of a national consensus in the country as well as the continuation of a political dialogue focusing on all segments of Iraqi society.

    Commenting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Erdoğan said Turkey has always supported the Palestinians. He also brought up the humanitarian tragedy in Gaza last winter, in which close to 1,400 Palestinians, including 252 children, were killed in Israel’s attacks.

    He called on the international community to fulfill its promises to the Gazans.

    26 September 2009, Saturday

    YONCA POYRAZ DOĞAN İSTANBUL

    Source: www.todayszaman.com, Sep 26, 2009

  • Black Sea Crisis Deepens As US-NATO Threat To Iran Grows

    Black Sea Crisis Deepens As US-NATO Threat To Iran Grows

    by Rick Rozoff

    15239

    Global Research, September 16, 2009

    Tensions are mounting in the Black Sea with the threat of another conflict between U.S. and NATO client state Georgia and Russia as Washington is manifesting plans for possible military strikes against Iran in both word and deed.

    Referring to Georgia having recently impounded several vessels off the Black Sea coast of Abkhazia, reportedly 23 in total this year, the New York Times wrote on September 9 that “Rising tensions between Russia and Georgia over shipping rights to a breakaway Georgian region have opened a potential new theater for conflict between the countries, a little more than a year after they went to war.” [1]

    Abkhazian President Sergei Bagapsh ordered his nation’s navy to respond to Georgia’s forceful seizure of civilian ships in neutral waters, calling such actions what they are – piracy – by confronting and if need be sinking Georgian navy and coast guard vessels. The Georgian and navy and coast guard are trained by the United States and NATO.

    The spokesman of the Russian Foreign Ministry addressed the dangers inherent in Georgia’s latest provocations by warning “They risk aggravating the military and political situation in the region and could result in serious armed incidents.” [2]

    On September 15 Russia announced that its “border guards will detain all vessels that violate Abkhazia’s maritime border….” [3]

    Russia would be not only entitled but obligated to provide such assistance to neighboring Abkhazia as “Under mutual assistance treaties signed last November, Russia pledged to help Abkhazia and South Ossetia protect their borders, and the signatories granted each other the right to set up military bases in their respective territories.” [4]

    In attempting to enforce a naval blockade – the International Criminal Court plans to include blockades against coasts and ports in its list of acts of war this year [5] – against Abkhazia, the current Georgian regime of Mikheil Saakashvili is fully aware that Russia is compelled by treaty and national interests alike to respond. Having been roundly defeated in its last skirmish with Russia, the five-day war in August of last year, Tbilisi would never risk actions like its current ones without a guarantee of backing from the U.S. and NATO.

    Days after last year’s war ended then U.S. Senator and now Vice President Joseph Biden flew into the Georgian capital to pledge $1 billion in assistance to the nation, making Georgia the third largest recipient of American foreign aid after Egypt and Israel.

    U.S. and NATO warships poured into the Black Sea in August of 2008 and American ships visited the Georgia port cities of Batumi and Poti to deliver what Washington described as civilian aid but which Russian sources suspected contained replacements for military equipment lost in the conflict.

    Less than a month after the war ended NATO sent a delegation to Georgia to “evaluate damage to military infrastructure following a five-day war between Moscow and Tbilisi….” [6]

    In December a meeting of NATO foreign ministers agreed upon a special Annual National Program for Georgia and in the same month Washington announced the creation of the United States-Georgia Charter on Strategic Partnership.

    In the past week a top-level delegation of NATO defense and logistics experts visited Georgia on September 9 “to promote the development of the Georgian Armed Forces” [7] and on September 14 high-ranking officials of the U.S. George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies arrived at the headquarters of the Georgian Ministry of Defense “to review issues of interdepartmental coordination in the course of security sector management and national security revision.” [8]

    The ongoing military integration of Georgia and neighboring Azerbaijan, which also borders Iran – Washington’s Georgetown University is holding a conference on Strategic Partnership between U.S. and Azerbaijan: Bilateral and Regional Criteria on September 18 – by the Pentagon and NATO is integrally connected with general military plans in the Black Sea and the Caucasus regions as a whole and, even more ominously, with joint war plans against Iran.

    As early as January of 2007 reports on that score surfaced in Bulgarian and Romanian news sources. Novinite (Sofia News Agency) reported that the Pentagon “could be using its two air force bases in Bulgaria and one on Romania’s Black Sea coast to launch an attack on Iran….” [9]

    The bases are the Bezmer and Graf Ignitievo airbases in Bulgaria and the Mihail Kogalniceanu counterpart near the Romanian city of Constanza on the Black Sea.

    The Pentagon has seven new bases altogether in Bulgaria and Romania and in addition to stationing warplanes – F-15s, F-16s and A-10 Thunderbolts – has 3,000-5,000 troops deployed in the two nations at any given time, and Washington established its Joint Task Force-East (JTF-East) permanent headquarters at the Mihail Kogalniceanu airbase in Romania.

    A U.S. government website provides these details about Joint Task Force-East:

    “All U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force training operations in Romania and Bulgaria will fall under the command of JTF–East, which in turn is under the command of USEUCOM [United States European Command]. Physically located in Romania and Bulgaria, JTF East will include a small permanent headquarters (in Romania) consisting of approximately 100-300 personnel who will oversee rotations of U.S. Army brigade-sized units and U.S. Air Force Weapons Training Deployments (WTD). Access to Romanian and Bulgarian air and ground training facilities will provide JTF-East forces the opportunity to train and interact with military forces throughout the entire 92-country USEUCOM area of responsibility. U.S. Army Europe (USAREUR) and U.S Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) are actively involved in establishing JTF-East.” [10]

    The four military bases in Romania and three in Bulgaria that the Pentagon and NATO have gained indefinite access to since the two nations were incorporated into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 2004 allow for full spectrum operations: Infantry deployments in the area and downrange to Afghanistan and Iraq, runways for bombers and fighter jets, docking facilities for American and NATO warships including Aegis class interceptor missile vessels, training grounds for Western special forces and for foreign armed forces being integrated into NATO.

    Added to bases and troops provided by Turkey and Georgia – and in the future Ukraine – the Bulgarian and Romanian sites are an integral component of plans by the U.S. and its allies to transform the Black Sea into NATO territory with only the Russian coastline not controlled by the Alliance. And that of newly independent Abkhazia, which makes control of that country so vital.

    Last week the Romanian defense ministry announced the intention to acquire between 48 and 54 new generation fighter jets – American F-16s and F-35s have been mentioned – as part of “a new strategy for buying multi-role aircraft, which means to first buy aircraft to make the transition to fifth generation equipment, over the coming 10-12 years.” [11]

    With the recent change in government in the former Soviet republic of Moldova – the aftermath of this April’s violent “Twitter Revolution” – the new parliamentary speaker, Mihai Ghimpu, has openly spoken of the nation merging with, which is to say being absorbed by, neighboring Romania. Transdniester [the Pridnestrovian Moldovan Republic] broke away from Moldova in 1990 exactly because of the threat of being pulled into Romania and fighting ensued which cost the lives of some 1,500 persons.

    Romania is now a member of NATO and should civil war erupt in Moldova and/or fighting flare up between Moldova and Transdniester and Romania sends troops – all but a certainty – NATO can activate its Article 5 military clause to intervene. There are 1,200 Russian peacekeepers in Transdniester.

    Transdniester’s neighbor to its east is Ukraine, linked with Moldova through the U.S.-concocted GUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Moldova) bloc, which has been collaborating in enforcing a land blockade against Transdniester. Ukraine’s President Viktor Yushchenko, whose poll ratings are currently in the low single digits, is hellbent on dragging his nation into NATO against overwhelming domestic opposition and can be counted on to attack Transdniester from the eastern end if a conflict breaks out.

    A Moldovan news source last week quoted an opposition leader issuing this dire warning:

    “Moldova’s ethnic minorities are categorically against unification with Romania.

    “If we, those who are not ethnic Moldovans, will have to defend Moldova’s
    statehood, then we will find powerful allies outside Moldova, including in Russia. Along with it, Ukraine, Turkey and Bulgaria would be involved in this fighting. Last year we all witnessed how Russia defended the interests of its nationals in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Why does somebody believe that in case of a civil war in Moldova Russia will simply watch how its nationals are dying? Our task is to prevent such developments.” [12]

    Indeed, the entire Black Sea and Caucasus regions could go up in flames if Western proxies in GUAM attack any of the so-called frozen conflict nations – Abkhazia and South Ossetia by Georgia, Nagorno Karabakh by Azerbaijan and Transdniester by Moldova and Ukraine. A likely possibility is that all four would be attacked simultaneously and in unison.

    An opportunity for that happening would be a concentrated attack on Iran, which borders Azerbaijan and Armenia. The latter, being the protector of Nagorno Karabakh, would immediately become a belligerent if Azerbaijan began military hostilities against Karabakh.

    On September 15 news stories revealed that the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington, DC, founded in 2007 by former Senate Majority Leaders Howard Baker, Tom Daschle, Bob Dole and George Mitchell, had released a report which in part stated, “If biting sanctions do not persuade the Islamic Republic to demonstrate sincerity in negotiations and give up its enrichment activities, the White House will have to begin serious consideration of the option of a U.S.-led military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.” [13]

    The report was authored by Charles Robb, a former Democratic senator from
    Virginia, Daniel Coats, former Republican senator from Indiana, and retired General Charles Wald, a former deputy commander of the U.S. European Command.

    Iran is to be given 60 days to in essence abandon its civilian nuclear power program and if it doesn’t capitulate the Obama administration should “prepare overtly for any military option” which would include “deploying an additional aircraft carrier battle group to the waters off Iran and conducting joint exercises with U.S. allies.” [14]

    The main Iranian nuclear reactor is being constructed at Bushehr and would be a main target of any U.S. and Israeli bombing and missile attacks. As of 2006 there were 3,700 Russian experts and technicians – and their families – living in the environs of the facility.

    It has been assumed for the past eight years that a military attack on Iran would be launched by the United States from aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf and by long-range Israeli bombers flying over Iraq and Turkey.

    During that period the U.S. and its NATO allies have also acquired access to airbases in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan (in Baluchistan, bordering Iran), Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in addition to those they already have in Turkey.

    Washington and Brussels have also expanded their military presence into Bulgaria, Georgia and Romania on the Black Sea and into Azerbaijan on the Caspian Sea bordering northeastern Iran.

    Plans for massive military aggression against Iran, then, might include air and missile strikes from locations much nearer the nation than previously suspected.

    The American Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced plans last week to supply Turkey, the only NATO member state bordering Iran, with almost $8 billion dollars worth of theater interceptor missiles, of the upgraded and longer-range PAC-3 (Patriot Advance Capability-3) model. The project includes delivering almost 300 Patriots for deployment at twelve command posts inside Turkey.

    In June the Turkish government confirmed that NATO AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) planes would be deployed in its Konya province.

    The last time AWACS and Patriot missiles were sent to Turkey was in late 2002 and early 2003 in preparation for the invasion of Iraq.

    On September 15 the newspaper of the U.S. armed forces, Stars and Stripes, ran an article titled “U.S., Israeli forces to test missile defense while Iran simmers,” which included these details on the biannual Juniper Cobra war games:

    “Some 1,000 U.S. European Command troops will soon deploy to Israel for a large-scale missile defense exercise with Israeli forces.

    “This year’s Juniper Cobra comes at a time of continued concern about Iran’s nuclear program, which will be the subject of talks in October.

    “The U.S. troops, from all four branches of service, will work alongside an equal number of Israel Defense Force personnel, taking part in computer-simulated war games….Juniper Cobra will test a variety of air and missile defense technology during next month’s exercise, including the U.S.-controlled X-Band.” [15]

    The same feature documented that this month’s exercise is the culmination of months of buildup.

    “In April, about 100 Europe-based personnel took part in a missile defense exercise that for the first time incorporated a U.S.-owned radar system, which was deployed to the country in October 2008. The U.S. X-Band radar is intended to give Israel early warning in the event of a missile launch from Iran.

    “For nearly a year, a mix of troops and U.S. Defense Department contractors have been managing the day-to-day operation of the X-Band, which is situated at Nevatim air base in the Negev Desert.” [16]

    The same publication revealed two days earlier that the Pentagon conducted a large-scale counterinsurgency exercise with the 173rd Airborne Brigade and the 12th Combat Aviation Brigade last week in Germany, “the largest such exercise ever held by the U.S. military outside of the United States….” [17] The two units are scheduled for deployment to Afghanistan and Iraq, respectively, but could be diverted to Iran, which has borders with both nations, should need arise.

    What the role of Black Sea NATO states and clients could be in a multinational, multi-vectored assault on Iran was indicated in the aftermath of last year’s Georgian-Russian war.

    At a news conference at NATO headquarters in Brussels a year ago, Russian ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin “said that Russian intelligence had obtained information indicating that the Georgian military infrastructure could be used for logistical support of U.S. troops if they launched an attack on Iran.” [18]

    Rogozin was further quoted as saying, “What NATO is doing now in Georgia is restoring its ability to monitor its airspace, in other words restoring the whole locator system and an anti-missile defence system which were destroyed by Russian artillery.

    “[The restoration of surveillance systems and airbases in Georgia is being] done for logistic support of some air operations either of the Alliance as a whole or of the United States in particular in this region. The swift reconstruction of the airfields and all the systems proves that some air operation is being planned against another country which is located not far from Georgia….” [19]

    Early last October Nikolai Patrushev, Secretary of the Russian Security
    Council “described the U.S. and NATO policy of increasing their military presence in Eastern Europe as seeking strategic military superiority over Russia.

    “The official added that the United States would need allies in the region if the country decided to attack Iran.” [20]

    Patrushev stated, “If it decides to carry out missile and bomb attacks
    against Iran, the US will need loyal allies. And if Georgia is involved in this war, this will pose additional threats to Russia’s national security.” [21]

    Later last October an Azerbaijani website reported that 100 Iranian Air Force jets were exercising near the nation’s border and that “military sources from the United States reported that territories in Azerbaijan and in Georgia may be used for attacking Iran….” [22]

    Writing in The Hindu the same month Indian journalist Atul Aneja wrote of the effects of the Georgian-Russian war of the preceding August and offered this information:

    “Russia’s military assertion in Georgia and a show of strength in parts of West Asia [Middle East], combined with domestic political and economic preoccupations in Washington, appear to have forestalled the chances of an immediate strike against Iran.

    “Following Russia’s movement into South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev acknowledged that Moscow was aware that serious plans to attack Iran had been laid out. ‘We know that certain players are planning an attack against Iran. But we oppose any unilateral step and [a] military solution to the nuclear crisis.’

    “Russia seized control of two airfields in Georgia from where air strikes against Iran were being planned. The Russian forces also apparently recovered weapons and Israeli spy drones that would have been useful for the surveillance of possible Iranian targets.” [23]

    The same newspaper, in quoting Dmitry Rogozin asserting that Russian military intelligence had captured documents proving Washington had launched “active military preparations on Georgia’s territory” for air strikes against Iran, added information on Israeli involvement:

    “Israel had supplied Georgia with sophisticated Hermes 450 UAV spy drones, multiple rocket launchers and other military equipment that Georgia, as well as modernised Georgia’s Soviet-made tanks that were used in the attack against South Ossetia. Israeli instructors had also helped train Georgia troops.” [24]

    Rather than viewing the wars of the past decade – against Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq – and the concomitant expansion of U.S. and NATO military presence inside all three countries and in several others on their peripheries as an unrelated series of events, the trend must be seen for what it is: A consistent and calculated strategy of employing each successive war zone as a launching pad for new aggression.

    The Pentagon has major military bases in Kosovo, in Afghanistan and in Iraq that it never intends to abandon. The U.S. and its NATO allies have bases in Bulgaria, Romania, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait, Bahrain (where the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet is headquartered) and other nations in the vicinity of the last ten years’ wars which can be used for the next ten – or twenty or thirty – years’ conflicts.

    1) New York Times, September 9, 2009
    2) Ibid
    3) Russian Information Agency Novosti, September 15, 2009
    4) Ibid
    5) Wikipedia
    6) Agence France-Presse, September 8, 2009
    7) Trend News Agency, September 9, 2009
    8) Georgia Ministry of Defence, September 14, 2009
    9) Turkish Daily News, January 30, 2007
    10) U.S. Department of State
    11) The Financiarul, September 9, 2009
    12) Infotag, September 11, 2009
    13) Bloomberg News, September 15, 2009
    14) Ibid
    15) Stars and Stripes, September 15, 2009
    16) Ibid
    17) Stars and Stripes, September 13, 2009
    18) Russian Information Agency Novosti, September 17, 2008
    19) Russia Today, September 17, 2008
    20) Russian Information Agency Novosti, October 1, 2008
    21) Fars News Agency, October 2, 2008
    22) Today.AZ, October 20, 2008
    23) The Hindu, October 13, 2008
    24) The Hindu, September 19, 2008

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/black-sea-crisis-deepens-as-us-nato-threat-to-iran-grows/15239