Category: Middle East

  • Turkish President Gul says Ahmadinejad faced terror threat during visit

    Turkish President Gul says Ahmadinejad faced terror threat during visit

    Ankara: Turkish police closed off main traffic routes in Istanbul during Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s visit because of a potential threat against him, Turkish President Abdullah Gul said on Saturday.

    Heavy security was brought in during Ahmadinejad’s visit on Thursday and Friday paralysing much of Istanbul’s road network because of large traffic jams. Many residents and tourists were stranded by the road closure.

    Gul apologised for the traffic situation but said Istanbul police had informed him of a possible threat that “they could not ignore”.

    Ahmandinejad also regretted the problems caused, Press TV reported.

    “I declare my love for the Turks. I am very sorry for the uneasiness felt by Turks and tourists, and I apologise to the Turkish people,” the Iranian president said.

    Source : gulfnews

  • USA : Calendar of Upcoming Anti-war Events

    USA : Calendar of Upcoming Anti-war Events

     

     

    Aug. 16 in Los Angeles: Demand immediate withdrawal of all troops from Iraq!


    Protest at the Republican and Democratic National Conventions
    January 20, 2009: Join thousands to demand “Bring the troops home now!”

    The ANSWER Coalition will be in the streets on Saturday August 16 in Los Angeles to demand an immediate withdrawal of all occupation forces from Irag and Afghanistan and end to all threats and sanctions against Iran.

    The Aug. 16 demonstration will coincide with a presidential forum at Saddleback Church in Orange County. Both McCain and Obama will be speaking there.

    This important mobilization marks the start of an intense 5-month period of mass action. After Los Angeles this Saturday, there will be important demonstrations at the Republican and Democratic Party Conventions.

    On January 20, 2009, when the next president proceeds up Pennsylvania Avenue he will see thousands of people carrying signs that say US Out of Iraq Now!, US Out of Afghanistan Now!, and Stop the Threats Against Iran! As in Vietnam it will be the people in the streets and not the politicians who can make the difference.

    On March 20, 2008, in response to a civil rights lawsuit brought against the National Park Service by the Partnership for Civil Justice on behalf of the ANSWER Coalition, a Federal Court ruled for ANSWER and determined that the government had discriminated against those who brought an anti-war message to the 2005 Inauguration. The court barred the government from continuing its illegal practices on Inauguration Day. 

    The Democratic and Republican Parties have made it clear that they intend to maintain the occupation of Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, and threaten a new war against Iran. Both Parties are completely committed to fund Israel’s on-going war against the Palestinian people. Both are committed to spending $600 billion each year so that the Pentagon can maintain 700 military bases in 130 countries. 

    On this the third anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, we are helping to build a nationwide movement to support working-class communities that are being devastated while the country’s resources are devoted to war and empire for for the sake of transnational banks and corporations.

    Join us in Los Angeles on August 16, in Denver on Aug. 25-28 at the Democratic Convention, in St. Paul at the Republican Convention between Sept. 1 and Sept. 4. And help organize bus and car caravans for January 20, 2009, Inauguration Day, so that whoever is elected president will see on Pennsylvania Avenue that the people want an immediate end to the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and to halt the threats against Iran.

    From Iraq to New Orleans, Fund Peoples Needs Not the War Machine! 

    Calendar of Events 

    — August 16 in Los Angeles: End the War Now! Click this link for information.
    — August 25-28 in Denver: Protest the Democratic National Convention
    — September 1-4 in St. Paul: Protest the Republican Convention
    — January 20, 2009: Bring the Anti-War Movement to Inauguration Day in D.C. 

    A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition

    info@internationalanswer.org
    National Office in Washington DC: 202-544-3389
    New York City: 212-694-8720
    Los Angeles: 213-251-1025
    San Francisco: 415-821-6545
    Chicago: 773-463-0311

  • Head of US Jewish Committee: “We are Azerbaijan’s friends”

    Head of US Jewish Committee: “We are Azerbaijan’s friends”

    Interview with David Harris, chief executive of the US Jewish committee.

    – What is your visit to Azerbaijan related to?

    – First of all, we have come here to observe the state of affairs in present-day Azerbaijan. It should be noted that this is my first visit to the country. Upon arrival to the United States, we will tell about everything, we have seen here. We are Azerbaijan’s friends.

    – Azerbaijan is closely cooperating with the US Jews lobby. Which role can the Jewish committee play in the due presentation of Azerbaijan in the United States, including in the US congress? (more…)

  • DEVILS AND DETAILS: AHMADINEJAD VISITS TURKEY

    DEVILS AND DETAILS: AHMADINEJAD VISITS TURKEY

    By Gareth Jenkins

    Thursday, August 14, 2008

     

    Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrived in Turkey on August 14 in the latest in a series of high level contacts between the two countries against a backdrop of growing international pressure on Tehran over its nuclear program. Both the United States and Israel have expressed their concern over the visit.

    Since it first came into power in November 2002, the Justice and Development Party (AKP) has vigorously sought to improve Turkey’s ties with the rest of the Muslim world. Professor Ahmet Davutoglu, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s chief foreign policy advisor, has described the shift in emphasis in terms of redressing a previous imbalance in Turkish foreign policy by creating what he calls “strategic depth” and strengthening ties with countries that previous Turkish governments had tended to neglect.

    Davutoglu undoubtedly has a point. Prior to the AKP taking office, the emphasis given to maintaining strong ties with the West had resulted not only in Ankara neglecting its relations with the countries of the Middle East but also in a dearth of expertise on the region both in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and in academia. Very few Turkish diplomats speak Arabic, for example, and at least until relatively recently any academic who bothered to learn the language was vulnerable to accusations of being a closet Islamist.

    For religious reasons, Arabic-speakers are much more common among the ranks of the AKP, but the AKP’s emotional enthusiasm for closer ties with the rest of the Muslim world has frequently been accompanied by an intellectual naivety, particularly in the party’s failure to understand how some of its initiatives appear to its Western allies. In February 2006, Davutoglu was the architect of a visit to Ankara by Hamas leader Khaled Mashal. Davutoglu appears to have calculated that Turkey would gain international kudos by persuading Mashal to moderate his attitude toward Israel. Yet Mashal did no such thing, merely using the visit to try to boost Hamas’s claim to international legitimacy. In January 2008, the AKP literally rolled out the red carpet for another international pariah, Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir, who paid a three-day official visit to Ankara (see EDM, January 22).

    A similar naivety can be seen in Erdogan’s recent peace initiative in the Caucasus. On August 8, Erdogan issued a statement proposing the creation of a “Caucasus Pact,” including Turkey, Russia, and other Caucasus countries and backed by the EU and the United States (CNNTurk, NTV, August 9). On August 13, Erdogan flew to Moscow where he met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. On the following day, the perennially insecure Turkish media basked in the contrast between what they claimed was the perfunctory welcome given by the Russians to French President Nicholas Sarkozy and the hospitality lavished on Erdogan. “Russia gives green light to Caucasus Pact,” the website of the daily Hurriyet proclaimed excitedly (www.hurriyet.com.tr). Neither the newspaper nor Erdogan appeared to realize that while all efforts to end the bloodshed were welcome, the whole point of Moscow’s fierce military response to Georgia’s attempt to regain control of South Ossetia was to demonstrate Russia’s hegemony in its “near abroad.” Moscow is unlikely to have any desire to dilute its authority through a pact, particularly one that brings the United States and the EU into the region.

    Nor did Erdogan appear to be aware that if the AKP were serious about Turkey acceding to the EU, he needed to try to ensure that Turkey’s foreign policies were coordinated with, or at least complementary to, those of the EU.

    The same naivety can also be seen in the AKP’s decision to push ahead with Ahmadinejad’s visit. There is no reason to doubt that AKP officials genuinely believe that the visit offers an opportunity for Turkey to boost its international standing by acting as an intermediary in the long-running standoff between Tehran and the international community over its nuclear program. What they do not appear to understand is how Ahmadinejad will use the visit to demonstrate both to the international community and to the public in Iran that the country is not alone.

    Speaking to Turkish journalists on the eve of his visit to Turkey, Ahmadinejad was effusive in his praise for the “great Turkish people,” the “great friendship between Turkey and Iran,” and his pleasure about the “ever-growing political ties” (CNNTurk, NTV, August 13). He also took the opportunity of the interview being broadcast at prime time on Turkish television to launch one of his characteristic tirades against Israel and repeat his support for the Palestinian opposition to what he described as the “occupying Zionist forces” (CNNTurk, NTV, August 13).

    In its eagerness to host Ahmadinejad, the AKP also acceded to his refusal to visit Anitkabir, the mausoleum of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk (1881-1938), the militant secularist who founded the modern Turkish Republic in 1923. Anitkabir is an essential part of a visit by any head of state to Turkey. Even al-Bashir visited Anitkabir to pay his respects, but the Iranians have consistently refused to do so.

    When it became clear that Ahmadinejad would not visit Anitkabir, his planned “official visit” was quickly downgraded to a “working visit”; and it was agreed that he would meet with both Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul not in Ankara, the capital of the modern republic, but in Istanbul, the old Ottoman capital (Hurriyet, Milliyet, August 5).

    In his interview on Turkish television, Ahmadinejad disingenuously claimed that he was traveling to Istanbul because that was where Gul and Erdogan were going to be anyway. This is not true; but when asked whether this meant that he would have visited Anitkabir if Gul and Erdogan had agreed to meet him in Ankara, Ahmadinejad prevaricated. “Turkey is a very large country and has a large population. There are a lot of places in Turkey. Of course, that means that there are many places for the president to go to,” he said (CNNTurk, NTV, August 13).

    In the run-up to Ahmadinejad’s visit, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan attacked the Turkish media for its coverage of his refusal to visit Anitkabir. “I consider these discussions about the details of the visit irrelevant,” declared Babacan (Zaman, Hurriyet, Milliyet, Radikal, August 5).

    But, as so often, the devil is in the details.

  • Iraq Demands “Clear Timeline” for US Withdrawal

    Iraq Demands “Clear Timeline” for US Withdrawal

    by: Robert H. Reid, The Associated Press

        Iraq’s foreign minister insisted Sunday that any security deal with the United States must contain a “very clear timeline” for the departure of U.S. troops. A suicide bomber struck north of Baghdad, killing at least five people including an American soldier.

        Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told reporters that American and Iraqi negotiators were “very close” to reaching a long-term security agreement that will set the rules for U.S. troops in Iraq after the U.N. mandate expires at the end of the year.

        Zebari said the Iraqis were insisting that the agreement include a “very clear timeline” for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces, but he refused to talk about specific dates.

        “We have said that this is a condition-driven process,” he added, suggesting that the departure schedule could be modified if the security situation changed.

        But Zebari made clear that the Iraqis would not accept a deal that lacks a timeline for the end of the U.S. military presence.

        “No, no definitely there has to be a very clear timeline,” Zebari replied when asked if the Iraqis would accept an agreement that did not mention dates.

        Differences over a withdrawal timetable have become one of the most contentious issues remaining in the talks, which began early this year. U.S. and Iraqi negotiators missed a July 31 target date for completing the deal, which must be approved by Iraq’s parliament.

        President Bush has steadfastly refused to accept any timetable for bringing U.S. troops home. Last month, however, Bush and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki agreed to set a “general time horizon” for a U.S. departure.

        Last week, two senior Iraqi officials told The Associated Press that American negotiators had agreement to a formula which would remove U.S. forces from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, with all combat troops out of the country by October 2010.

        The last American support troops would leave about three years later, the Iraqis said.

        But U.S. officials insist there is no agreement on specific dates. Both the American and Iraqi officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the talks are ongoing. Iraq’s Shiite-led government believes a withdrawal schedule is essential to win parliamentary approval.

        American officials have been less optimistic because of major differences on key issues including who can authorize U.S. military operations and immunity for U.S. troops from prosecution under Iraqi law.

        The White House said discussions continued on a bilateral agreement and said any timeframe discussed was due to major improvements in security over the past year.

        “We are only now able to discuss conditions-based time horizons because security has improved so much. This would not have been possible 18 months ago,” White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said Sunday. “We all look forward to the day when Iraqi security forces take the lead on more combat missions, allowing U.S. troops to serve in an overwatch role, and more importantly return home.”

        Iraq’s position in the U.S. talks hardened after a series of Iraqi military successes against Shiite and Sunni extremists in Basra, Baghdad, Mosul and other major cities.

        Violence in Iraq has declined sharply over the past year following a U.S. troop buildup, a Sunni revolt against al-Qaida in Iraq and a Shiite militia cease-fire.

        But attacks continue, raising concern that the militants are trying to regroup.

        The suicide bomber struck Sunday afternoon as U.S. and Iraqi troops were responding to a roadside bombing that wounded an Iraqi in Tarmiyah, 30 miles (50 kilometers) north of Baghdad, the U.S. military said.

        Four Iraqi civilians were killed along with the American soldier, military spokesman Lt. Col. Steve Stover said. Two American soldiers and an Iraqi interpreter were among 24 people wounded.

        No group claimed responsibility for the blast but suicide bombings are the signature attack of al-Qaida in Iraq.

        “This was a heinous attack by al-Qaida in Iraq against an Iraqi family, followed by a cowardly attack against innocent civilians, their security forces and U.S. soldiers,” Stover said.

        Elsewhere, a car bomb exploded outside the Kurdish security department in Khanaqin, 90 miles northeast of Baghdad. At least two people were killed and 25 wounded, including the commander of local Kurdish forces, Lt. Col. Majid Ahmed, police said.

        First reports indicated it was a suicide attack. But the U.S. military later said the bomb was in a white truck filled with watermelons and that witnesses saw the occupants leave the vehicle just before the blast.

        Ethnic tensions have been rising in northern Iraq amid disputes between Kurds, Turkomen and mostly Sunni Arabs over Kurdish demands to annex the oil-rich city of Kirkuk into their self-ruled region.

        Sawarah Ghalib, 25, who was wounded in the blast, said he believed military operations under way south of the city in Diyala province had pushed insurgents into the Khanaqin area.

        “I did not expect that a terrorist attack to take place in our secure town,” Ghalib said from his bed in the Khanaqin hospital. “Al-Qaida is to blame for this attack. Operations in Diyala have pushed them here.”

        In Baghdad, six people were killed in a series of bombings on the first day of the Iraqi work week.

        The deadliest blast occurred about 8:15 a.m. in a crowded area where people wait for buses in the capital’s mainly Shiite southeastern district of Kamaliya. Four people were killed, including a woman and her brother, and 11 others wounded, according to police.

        A car bomb later exploded as an Iraqi army patrol transporting money to a state-run bank passed by in Baghdad’s central Khillani square, killing two people including an Iraqi soldier and wounding nine other people, a police officer said.

        Another Iraqi soldier was killed and five were wounded by a car bomb in Salman Pak, about 15 miles south of Baghdad, police said.

        ——–

        Associated Press writers Hamza Hendawi, Kim Gamel and Sameer N. Yacoub in Baghdad and Yahya Barzanji in Sulaimaniyah contributed to this report.

  • Turkey walks tightrope over Iran ties

    Turkey walks tightrope over Iran ties


    By Paul de Bendern
    Reuters
    Tuesday, August 12, 2008; 9:13 AM

     

    ISTANBUL (Reuters) – A visit by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Turkey on Thursday reflects a desire by the NATO member to remain on good terms with an unpredictable neighbor and secure future energy needs.

    President Abdullah Gul and Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan have come under criticism at home and abroad for inviting Ahmadinejad, a visit that marks a diplomatic coup for the firebrand leader who has been shunned by European countries.

    Ankara has said his visit was necessary given the standoff between Iran and the West over Tehran’s disputed nuclear enrichment program, and offered to help resolve the dispute.

    But analysts said the trip was more about ensuring centuries-old ties during a period of global tensions.

    “Although Turkey doesn’t like the present regime it has always tried to keep Iranians both at bay and collaborate with them. It is an extremely delicate balancing act and it will continue to be so,” said Cengiz Aktar, a political scientist at Istanbul’s Bahcesehir University.

    “The visit is all about controlled risks and the most important aspect is a gas deal with Iran, not the nuclear program because Turkey has little influence on that,” he said.

    Turkey and Iran share a border dating to a 1639 peace treaty.

    Ahmadinejad has been courting Turkey in the past few years as the United States has stepped up efforts to isolate Iran for failing to halt its disputed nuclear enrichment program. Washington sees the president’s visit as undermining such moves. Israel, another ally of Turkey, has also criticized the visit.

    Gul and Erdogan — both founders of the Islamist-rooted ruling AK Party — have pushed to boost Turkey’s position in the Middle East region, building greater ties with neighboring countries than previous governments.

    TRADE TIES

    Though Iran and Turkey are close geographically, historically and culturally, they have remained distant in policy and direction since the Iranian revolution in 1979.

    Turkey, which is seeking European Union membership, is also concerned at the repercussions were the United States or Israel to strike the Islamic Republic.

    “Ankara definitely does not sympathize with the ‘theodemocracy’ (theocracy-partial democracy) of Iran. … But not having a hostile attitude against Iran is important for Turkey’s domestic stability as well as its energy needs,” said Sahin Alpay, a columnist for conservative daily Zaman.

    Turkey is entirely dependent on energy imports to quench its increasing thirst for oil and gas as its industry expands. Iran is currently its second biggest supplier of gas after Russia.

    Bilateral trade reached $5 billion in the first half of 2008 and Turkey has pledged to invest $3.5 billion in Iranian gas production. Ankara and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding but are yet to sign a comprehensive agreement to invest in Iran’s South Pars gas field project.

    Part of that deal agreement may be signed on Thursday.

    Turkey is also a major transit route for goods between the European Union and Iran.

    Turkey, an officially secular but predominantly Sunni Muslim country, has long been wary over Shi’ite Tehran’s effort to export its style of Islamic Republic, its meddling in the region and its true intentions regarding its nuclear program.

    Iran has on the other hand resented Turkey’s Western orientation and reluctance to back Tehran against U.S. and EU pressure, now in the form of economic sanctions.

    News reports that Ahmadinejad did not wish to visit the tomb of Turkey’s revered founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in Ankara have caused a stir. Protocol requires foreign leaders to visit the mausoleum and Turkish media said Gul had subsequently moved the trip to Istanbul to avoid a potential embarrassing moment.

    While tensions have simmered from time to time each country clearly recognizes they have mutual interests.

    Tehran’s help in tackling Kurdish separatists based in northern Iraq has also boosted bilateral ties with Turkey, to the dismay of Washington, which until recently offered little help in moving against Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) bases.

    “Will the visit really help Turkey? I doubt it. It’s more beneficial for Ahmadinejad. He’ll get another 15 minutes in the spotlight when he unleashes his trademark attacks against Israel and the United States,” said a senior EU diplomat.

    (Editing by Mary Gabriel)