Turkish Forum

Category: Middle East & Africa

  • Syria After the U.S. Helicopter Raid

    Syria After the U.S. Helicopter Raid

    By YONAH ALEXANDER

    There is an old Arabic proverb stating that “he who gets fat, will get thin, and he who goes up in the air will come down.” The simple meaning is that nothing is static in the affairs of life and each epoch has its beginning and end.

     

    Can this perception be applied to politics and the current challenge of state sponsored terrorism to the international community? The short answer is definitely yes. Consider the case of Syria.

     

    It seems an unthinkable contradiction to even raise the issue that Syrian President Bashar Assad might cooperate with the United States in combating terrorism following the massive demonstrations in Damascus protesting against a U.S. helicopter raid in Sukariyah village that killed top al-Qaida leader Abu Ghadiyah and members of his cell, and after Syria’s closing of the U.S. cultural center and American school in the capital in protest, and Damascus’s demand of a formal U.S. apology for “terrorist aggression.”

     

    Moreover, Washington’s “account” with Syria relates not only to securing the border with Iraq from infiltration of foreign terrorists but also to Damascus’ support of Hezbollah and Fatah al-Islam in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza and in the West Bank.

     

    Thus, it is extremely unlikely the next U.S. administration will reverse its disposition vis-à-vis Syria and consider removing it from the list of state sponsors of terrorism.

     

    The new president, however, must bear in mind the validity of former British Prime Minister Lord Palmerston’s dictum that “there are no permanent friends or enemies but only permanent interests.”

     

    That is, there are several identifying factors which indicate that Syria is possibly reconsidering using terrorism as a tool. The first is the existence of legal measures to combat terrorism.

     

    Syria, for instance, is party to the Arab League and the Islamic Conference Organization conventions on the suppression of terrorism and on combating international terrorism.

     

    Furthermore, Syria is a signatory to global treaties dealing with aviation security matters and “prevention and punishment of crimes against internationally protected persons.”

     

    Also, Syria’s penal code complies with various international anti-terrorism efforts such as combating money laundering, confiscating and freezing of funds related to terrorism, and suppressing the recruitment of members of terrorist groups.

     

    Clearly, these steps and other judicial measures indicate a positive trend to be considered in any assessment of Syria’s policies concerning terrorism.

     

    What is of particular significance is the progress made by the recent rounds of indirect talks between Damascus and Jerusalem through Turkey’s “good offices,” and supported by other states such as France.

     

    Obviously, Assad’s apparent strategic intention to undertake a comprehensive peace settlement with Israel will, in accordance with long-standing Syrian policy, focus first and foremost on the return of the occupied Golan Heights captured in the 1967 War.

     

    Other crucial issues must also be resolved, including early warning attack systems, mutual zones of disengagements, water conflicts, and the scope of normalizing relations between the antagonists.

     

    It is clear that further progress on this diplomatic track will depend on political developments in Israel related to the forthcoming elections planned for February 2009 and the formation of a new government in Jerusalem.

     

    In sum, despite the unfolding crisis in U.S.-Syrian relations concerning the “rat lines” in Iraq and other terrorism-related issues, it behooves all concerned parties to recognize that substantial, peacemaking efforts must be developed for long-term stability and prosperity in the Middle East and beyond.

    —

    Yonah Alexander is the Director of the International Center for Terrorism Studies at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies in Arlington, Va., USA. Research for this article was provided by Michelle Zewin, Julie Tegho, Daniel Curzon, and Kendall McKay.

  • Kirkuk needs a surge, report says

    Kirkuk needs a surge, report says

    WASHINGTON, Oct. 30 (UPI) — An organic effort along the lines of the Anbar counterinsurgency strategy is needed to calm the security situation in Iraq’s province of Kirkuk, a study says.

    A study published Thursday by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy says Kirkuk has not felt the benefits of the counterinsurgency strategy employed in Anbar and central Iraq in early 2007.

    The level of violence in Kirkuk remains static, with only a 29 percent drop in deadly attacks since 2007, compared to a 91 percent decline in Baghdad. Taken on a per capita basis, however, the number of attacks in the city of Kirkuk is double that in Baghdad, the report says.

    The durability of the Sunni-led insurgency in the north suggests a failure to employ the strategy of forming multi-ethnic security forces in the region. Unlike the south, northern security forces are predominately Kurdish-led, leaving many of the forces from Baghdad viewed with disdain.

    Furthermore, with U.S. forces dropping below the U.N.- and NATO-recommended ratio of one soldier to 50 civilians ahead of an anticipated 2009 redeployment, a final but temporary U.S. troop surge may be needed in Kirkuk.

    The region is one of Iraq’s most economically viable, leaving Kirkuk as one of the last places left for U.S.-led forces to have a positive influence on security matters.

  • Oil for Soil: A Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds

    Oil for Soil: A Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds

    Kirkuk/Brussels, 28 October 2008: Rising acrimony over disputed territories will undermine still fragile progress in Iraq unless a package deal is reached over oil, revenue sharing, federalism and the constitution.

    Oil for Soil: Toward a Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds,* the latest report from the International Crisis Group, offers a bold proposal for resolving the long-festering conflict over Kirkuk and other disputed territories that threatens to disrupt Iraq’s relative peace.

    “In its ethnically-driven intensity and its ability to drag in regional players such as Turkey and Iran, the Kirkuk issue can have a devastating impact on efforts to rebuild a fragmented state”, says Joost Hiltermann, Crisis Group’s Middle East Deputy Program Director. “This conflict potentially matches or even exceeds the Sunni-Shiite divide that spawned the 2005-2007 sectarian war”.

    Despite some progress, Iraq’s legislative agenda is bogged down primarily by a dispute over territories claimed by the Kurds as historically belonging to them – territories that contain as much as 13 per cent of Iraq’s proven oil reserves. Stymied in their quest to incorporate these territories into the Kurdistan region by constitutional means, due mainly to the suspicions of Iraq’s Arab majority that their real goal is independence, Kurdish leaders have signalled their intent to hold politics in Baghdad hostage. At the same time, the Iraqi government’s growing military assertiveness is challenging the Kurds’ de facto control over the territories.

    The current piecemeal approach should be discarded in favour of a grand bargain involving all core issues: Kirkuk and other disputed territories, revenue-sharing and the hydrocarbons law, as well as federalism and constitutional revisions. A sober assessment of all sides’ core requirements suggests a possible package deal around an “oil-for-soil” trade-off: in exchange for at least deferring their exclusive claim on Kirkuk for a decade, the Kurds would obtain demarcation and security guarantees for their internal boundary with the rest of Iraq, as well as the right to manage and profit from their own mineral wealth.

    This package demands painful concessions from all sides, which they are unlikely to make without strong international involvement. The UN mission (UNAMI) will need stronger backing from the U.S. and its allies. Washington should make it a priority to steer politicians toward the grand bargain, while securing it through political, financial and diplomatic support.

    “There is little time to waste. As U.S. forces are set to draw down, Washington’s leverage will diminish, as will chances for a workable deal”, warns Robert Malley, Crisis Group’s Middle East & North Africa Program Director. “The likeliest alternative is a new outbreak of violent strife over unsettled claims in a fragmented polity governed by chaos and fear”.

    Contacts: Andrew Stroehlein (Brussels) +32 (0) 2 541 1635
    Kimberly Abbott (Washington) +1 202 785 1601
    To contact Crisis Group media please click here
    *Read the full Crisis Group report on our website: http://www.crisisgroup.org
  • Turkey facing gas shortage

    Turkey facing gas shortage

    ANKARA, Turkey, Oct. 28 (UPI) — Turkey is faced with the possibility of a severe gas shortage if development of an Iranian natural gas pipeline falters, the state-owned pipeline firm said.

    BOTAS, the oil and natural gas pipeline firm in Turkey, warned government officials that gas shortages would emerge as early as January if a pipeline from the Iranian South Pars gas field was not completed soon, the business daily newspaper Referans reported Tuesday.

    Ankara and Tehran had agreed to develop additional arteries to meet Turkish demands as gas compression issues diminished the capacity along conventional routes.

    Iran hopes to link its South Pars gas field to the planned Nabucco pipeline, a project favored by the European Union as a means to ease dependency on Russian natural resources.

    Iran is keen on expanding its customer base amid Western-imposed economic sanctions as punishment for its controversial nuclear program. For its part, BOTAS has urged Iran to act expeditiously on developing its infrastructure to avoid shortages.

  • INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP – NEW REPORT Oil for Soil: A Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds

    INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP – NEW REPORT Oil for Soil: A Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds

     

    Kirkuk/Brussels, 28 October 2008: Rising acrimony over disputed territories will undermine still fragile progress in Iraq unless a package deal is reached over oil, revenue sharing, federalism and the constitution.

    Oil for Soil: Toward a Grand Bargain on Iraq and the Kurds,* the latest report from the International Crisis Group, offers a bold proposal for resolving the long-festering conflict over Kirkuk and other disputed territories that threatens to disrupt Iraq’s relative peace.

    “In its ethnically-driven intensity and its ability to drag in regional players such as Turkey and Iran, the Kirkuk issue can have a devastating impact on efforts to rebuild a fragmented state”, says Joost Hiltermann, Crisis Group’s Middle East Deputy Program Director. “This conflict potentially matches or even exceeds the Sunni-Shiite divide that spawned the 2005-2007 sectarian war”.

    Despite some progress, Iraq’s legislative agenda is bogged down primarily by a dispute over territories claimed by the Kurds as historically belonging to them – territories that contain as much as 13 per cent of Iraq’s proven oil reserves. Stymied in their quest to incorporate these territories into the Kurdistan region by constitutional means, due mainly to the suspicions of Iraq’s Arab majority that their real goal is independence, Kurdish leaders have signalled their intent to hold politics in Baghdad hostage. At the same time, the Iraqi government’s growing military assertiveness is challenging the Kurds’ de facto control over the territories.

    The current piecemeal approach should be discarded in favour of a grand bargain involving all core issues: Kirkuk and other disputed territories, revenue-sharing and the hydrocarbons law, as well as federalism and constitutional revisions. A sober assessment of all sides’ core requirements suggests a possible package deal around an “oil-for-soil” trade-off: in exchange for at least deferring their exclusive claim on Kirkuk for a decade, the Kurds would obtain demarcation and security guarantees for their internal boundary with the rest of Iraq, as well as the right to manage and profit from their own mineral wealth.

    This package demands painful concessions from all sides, which they are unlikely to make without strong international involvement. The UN mission (UNAMI) will need stronger backing from the U.S. and its allies. Washington should make it a priority to steer politicians toward the grand bargain, while securing it through political, financial and diplomatic support.

    “There is little time to waste. As U.S. forces are set to draw down, Washington’s leverage will diminish, as will chances for a workable deal”, warns Robert Malley, Crisis Group’s Middle East & North Africa Program Director. “The likeliest alternative is a new outbreak of violent strife over unsettled claims in a fragmented polity governed by chaos and fear”.

    Contacts: Andrew Stroehlein (Brussels) +32 (0) 2 541 1635
    Kimberly Abbott (Washington) +1 202 785 1601
    To contact Crisis Group media please click here
    *Read the full Crisis Group report on our website: http://www.crisisgroup.org

    The International Crisis Group (Crisis Group) is an independent, non-profit, non-governmental organisation covering some 60 crisis-affected countries and territories across four continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict.

  • Syria hits out at ‘terrorist’ US

    Syria hits out at ‘terrorist’ US

    Syria’s foreign minister has accused the US of an act of “criminal and terrorist aggression” over what it says was a helicopter raid on its territory.

    Walid Muallem said Sunday’s attack saw four US aircraft travel eight miles inside Syrian airspace from Iraq and kill eight unarmed civilians on a farm.

    Unnamed US military officials have said the attack targeted and killed a high profile al-Qaeda operative.

    But the White House has not confirmed or denied the alleged raid.

    Walid Muallem: We put the responsibility on the American government

    A US official was quoted by the AFP news agency as saying that its forces had mounted a “successful” raid against foreign fighters threatening US forces in Iraq.

    He said the raid was believed to have killed “one of the most prominent foreign fighter facilitators in the region”.

    The BBC’s Kim Ghattas in Washington says the person targeted was Abu Ghadiyah, an Iraqi from Mosul.

    He was the leader of a network which smuggled fighters into Iraq and had been put on a US Treasury Department black list in February for funding and arming insurgents, says our correspondent.

    The military official quoted by AFP said: “Look when you’ve got an opportunity, an important one, you take it”.

    “That’s what the American people would expect, particularly when it comes to foreign fighters going into Iraq, threatening our forces.”

    The US has previously accused Syria of allowing militants into Iraq, but Mr Muallem insisted his country was trying to tighten border controls.

    ‘An opportunity’

    Speaking at a news conference in London, Mr Muallem said the raid on the town of Abu Kamal had killed a father and his three children, a farm guard and his wife, and a fisherman.

    Mr Muallem said the raid was “not a mistake” and that he had urged the Iraqi government to investigate.

    “We consider this criminal and terrorist aggression. We put the responsibility on the American government,” he told reporters following talks with UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband.

    He added: “All of them [the victims] are civilians, Syrian, unarmed and they are on the Syrian territories.

    “Killing civilians in international law means a terrorist aggression.”

    Asked if Syria would use force if a similar operation was mounted, he said: “As long as you are saying if, I tell you, if they do it again, we will defend our territories.”

    Referring to the US presidential election, he said: “We hope the coming administration will learn the mistakes of this administration.”

    Mr Muallem and Mr Miliband were scheduled to hold a joint press conference, but Mr Miliband withdrew. The UK government has declined to comment on the raid.

    Exclusive BBC footage of the site of the alleged raid

    BBC