Category: USA

Turkey could be America’s most important regional ally, above Iraq, even above Israel, if both sides manage the relationship correctly.

  • A Defining Statue of Ataturk

    A Defining Statue of Ataturk

    Posted by Bulent Atalay of Author, National Geographic Books;

    author, Smithsonian Books; Prof. UMW, Adj Prof UVA. on December 10, 2013

    : “The new statue of Atatürk represents the first public monument in the United States honoring one of the towering figures of the 20th century.”

    On December 5, 2013 Nelson Mandela died, one of the most successful fighters for social justice in history. Cut from the same cloth as Mahatma Gandhi, he helped to liberate his nation from racial and colonial oppression, and went on to unify his nation. Mandela had started his decades of struggles as a militant, though not a military hero, but embraced peace and healing in his mature years. Standing in front of the South African Embassy in Washington is a powerful bronze statue of Nelson Mandela, his right hand stretched upward in a clenched fist, symbolic of the fight that he had carried on the better part of his life. Mandela’s statue was unveiled on September 21, 2013 by his grateful nation.

    A month ago on November 10, the Atatürk Society of America (ASA) unveiled a full-sized bronze statue of Kemal Atatürk. Located on the periphery of Sheridan Circle, next to the Turkish Ambassador’s Residence at 1606 23rd Street, NW, Washington, DC, this is the first public monument in the United States honoring the greatest Turk of them all. Its timing coincides with both the 90th Anniversary of the founding of the secular Republic of Turkey in 1923 and the 75th Anniversary of Atatürk’s death on November 10, 1938. He too had liberated his nation — first from occupying foreign troops and then from centuries of backward Caliphate Rule. He wanted his new democratic republic to face westward — adopt a secular system of governance with full gender equality — and he launched reform after reform that brought his nation into the 20th Century.

    A full-size statue of Atatürk already stood on the grounds of the Turkish Embassy at 1625 Massachusetts Avenue, but it was not readily accessible to the public, standing on raised ground behind a massive wrought iron fence surrounding the embassy. Moreover, it was in the style of Eastern European heroic statuary, made of fiberglass, and over-painted in bronze tones. The ASA thought that Atatürk deserved better. The Turkish-American architect Nuray Anahtar drew preliminary plans for the new statue to be placed at the center of a semicircular balustrade surrounding an indentation in the wall of the Turkish Ambassador’s Residence. And she nimbly carried the applications for permits through meetings with a plethora of city officials — the Advisory Neighborhood Commission, the DC Board for Public Spaces, and the Historic Preservation Commission. What made the site unique was its location squarely on DC public space donated for the statue by the City. As such, the statue represents the first public monument in the United States honoring one of the greatest leaders of the 20th century.

    The consensus of the Board of the Atatürk Society was to have Kemal Atatürk depicted in a timeless realistic style and cast in bronze. The Board had to decide the age at which to depict Atatürk — as a young military officer struggling with battle strategy and wearing a uniform replete with a “kalpak” (a sheepskin fez); as the new President of the Secular Republic that he founded, and still wearing a fez; or as the mature statesman in the early 1930s, svelte, but an elegant modern man. There was consensus in the Committee’s decision: he would be depicted as a thoroughly modern man, determined and exuding the legendary confidence that had defined him in life. For Turks, images of Atatürk are embedded deep in their marrow. They have all spent their lives communing with images of Atatürk, and although they might have their own favorite visions of the man, they can immediately assess whether an image produced by an artist even resembles him. Finally, the finished product had to be produced in record time.

    JEFFREY HALL, SCULPTOR

    A small list of four talented sculptors was drawn up as candidates to be considered for the commission: one in Azerbaijan; another in Salt Lake City, Utah; and a pair of young local artists whose names were provided by Lindy Hart, the widow of Frederick “Rick” Hart” (1942-1999), one of the great sculptors of the last quarter of the 20th century. Rick Hart had carved the Tympanum, including his masterpiece, the “Ex Nihilo,” above the Western Entrance of the National Cathedral. Then a few years later, he had created the bronze statue of the “Three Soldiers” at the Vietnam Memorial, the full complex standing in the shadow of the Lincoln Memorial. The statue of the soldiers is a realistic and extraordinarily powerful portrayal of three heavily armed soldiers trudging through the jungles of Vietnam. The two younger candidates had both worked for many years as Rick Hart’s assistants.

    Jeff Hall is seen working on the 34″ clay model of the statue, with the original 12″ maquette in the background, and the bust on the right.

    Deciding to go with one of the two younger sculptors turned out to be a crucial decision. Jeffrey L. Hall lived no farther than one-hour’s distance from Washington, and he insisted that he could produce the finished piece in roughly six months. The committee came to realize quickly that he was always open to suggestions, and always willing to make changes, no matter how drastic. A few of the members made at least a dozen visits to Jeff’s studio in rural Virginia to oversee the work in progress and to offer new suggestions. Rick Hart’s comment that Jeff’s “…quality of work rivals any in history,” became a source of confidence, tempering the fear of the well-worn aphorism, “A camel is a thoroughbred designed by a committee!” Jeff knew nothing about Atatürk before he started working on his initial clay model, a 12” high maquette. But as he immersed himself in the hundreds of photos, and even old films that captured his subject’s general demeanor and movement, he became as familiar with Atatürk’s deportment as any Turk. “The Incredible Turk,” a 1958 documentary narrated by Walter Cronkite, was especially useful for this purpose. The maquette was then rescaled to a 34” tall clay model. In this second redaction, the subject’s stance could be modified in rescaling it again to a full 6’7” model. Simultaneously, Jeff started working on a full-size bust that would be integrated into the final statue.

    Left: The cast bronze arms, before they are welded to the statue. Center: the details of book, “Nutuk,” in the statue’s left hand. Right: Wingtip shoes introduced in the early 1930s, known to have been worn by Atatürk.

    After the full-size clay model is prepared, molds are created of the separate components: the bust, the arms, the torso… Molten bronze is then poured into the molds, before the components are welded together. In the photo above, a worker in the Lara Bronze Foundry in Philadelphia is seen painting on the patina and curing it with the heat of a blow torch.

    As the author of a pair of books on Leonardo da Vinci (“Math and the Mona Lisa,” Smithsonian Books, 2004) and “Leonardo’s Universe” (National Geographic Books, 2009) I could bring suggestions based on my knowledge of the Renaissance genius’s own words. Leonardo, in painting “The Last Supper,” had emphasized the importance of the hands, “The subject should speak with his hands as much as with his facial expressions.“ From the beginning I frequently spoke about Leonardo’s dictum regarding the importance of the hands. In Jeff’s statue Atatürk is depicted as a reformer/teacher, giving a speech. In his left hand he is holding a heavy book with the title “Nutuk” (“The Speech”). The book is resting on his hip, but with his index finger he is holding his place in the book. The right hand captures the electric moment when he has paused to make a point with his index finger, the intensity dramatized by the bulging veins in his hand.

    In the plaster cast made from the original mode, the sculptor has conveyed the illusion of light colored eyes by making the irises especially shallow.

    Among other details, Jeff captures Atatürk’s “renkli gözleri” (his blue-gray eyes) in a dark bronze statue. The illusion of light colored eyes, in distinction to those with dark color, is achieved by making the irises much shallower than they would otherwise be in depicting a subject with dark eyes. (Among the accompanying photos, a white plaster bust, cast directly from the mold for the bronze, reveals this trick.) Another subtle detail that few visitors would be expected to recognize is the direction of the stripes on Atatürk’s tie. Mathematically speaking, these stripes display “negative slope” (lower right-to-upper left). This style of stripe is known as the “American Stripe.” In distinction, the European (and other non-American) striped ties usually display positive slopes (lower left-to-upper right). In examining photos of Ataturk wearing ties, we found that his ties of choice had the American Stripe. One can only speculate about his personal collection of ties being presented to him by the American Ambassador in Ankara, or perhaps one of the Turkish Ambassadors who once occupied the Embassy in Washington. The details of the statue also include the chain for his pocket watch, draped naturally in a parabola across his vest, and in homage to his military days, his medal, partially covered by his right lapel. Standing next to the 6’7” bronze statue, perched on a 3” bronze base, one can sense Atatürk’s figure exuding that abstract quality described in Turkish as, “heybetli,” an unmistakable heroic presence.

    In a day when genuinely great statesman seem to be rare, when a priestly class (whether clerics in Iran, rabbis of the ultra-Orthodox in Israel, or fundamentalists preachers in the United States) endorses taking one side or another in endless internecine warfare, it might be good to remember a couplet written by the English poet William Blake (1757-1827): “Mysteries will never cease; the Priest clamors for war, and the soldier peace.” He could not have been more prescient, or more accurate, in describing Atatürk. The unrivaled military tactician and strategist, who was undefeated in the military campaigns that had consumed the first three decades of his life, became the greatest proponent for peace once he established the Republic of Turkey. On the balustrade surrounding Atatürk’s statue, are his words in bronze lettering, “Peace at home… Peace in the World.” This is also reminiscent of the late Mr. Mandela.

    Gutzon Borglum’s equestrian statue, of General Sheridan (left). Borglum’s “Heads of Presidents” at Mount Rushmore in South Dakota.

    SHERIDAN CIRCLE

    The address, Sheridan Circle, is at the top of any short list of prime real estate in Washington, with the Embassy Row of Massachusetts Avenue radiating east and west from the circle. Several embassies line the rim of the circle. Along with the former Turkish Embassy (now the Ambassador’s Residence) there is the Romanian Embassy on the southern side, the Greek Embassy on the northeast, and the Embassy of Pakistan on the northwest. In front of several of the embassies stand statues of prominent statesmen, including Greece’s early 20th century Prime Minister, Eleftherios Venizelos, whose armed forces had fought Turkey until 1922, and who nominated Kemal Atatürk for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1934. A statue of Gandhi stands a quarter mile to the east, and the statues of Churchill and Mandela facing each other stand a mile to the west of Sheridan Circle. The centerpiece of the circle, however, is an equestrian statue of the Union General Philip Sheridan, for whom the circle is named. The equestrian statue, weathered naturally to a green patina during the 105 years it has stood at the site, is extraordinarily beautiful in its own right. The sculptor of the statue, Gutzon Borglum, is far better known as the sculptor of the heads of Presidents at Mount Rushmore in South Dakota. The most recent of the four was Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt, the 26th President, a good and colorful leader, but one who does not rise to the stratospheric prominence achieved by the other three. For Teddy Roosevelt, the timing was right. He was the reigning President when the monument was created, he was unusually fond of the West, and he was a friend of the sculptor.

    The other three — Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln — are unrivaled as the greatest among the 44 Presidents in the history of the United States. The First President, General George Washington, unfaltering military leader who ultimately defeated the British, stands as the “Father of the Nation,” The third President, Thomas Jefferson, a brilliant theorist and political writer, authored the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson also strongly believed that religion was a personal choice that should be free from government interference. Then there is Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth President, who held the United States together during the dark years of the Civil War. He authored the Emancipation Proclamation. Each member of this iconic trio is honored with an impressive architectural edifice in the city, his own National Monument.

    Atatürk embodies the greatest assets of Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln — military strategist par excellence; social, educational and economic reformer; statesman — Father of his Country — the man the distinguished professor of psychiatry, Arnold Ludwig, in his 2002 book, “The King of the Mountain,” ranked Number One among all 2300 national leaders of the 20th century.

    In the waning days of the 20th century, the Editors of Time Magazine, accustomed to selecting the “Individual of the Year,” found themselves saddled with the difficult task of selecting the “Individual of the Century.” Turks expressed their exuberance by the thousands in nominating Atatürk for the honor. The editors must have reasoned first that this was a concerted effort organized in Ankara or Istanbul. Then they must have felt, Atatürk was indeed a towering figure of the 20th century, but that his influence had been limited to a small sector of the planet. Accordingly, they must have felt compelled to eliminate him from the top spot. But others in the running, both good and bad, included FDR, Churchill, Mao Zedong and Hitler… Finally, Time Magazine announced its choice for the “Individual of the Century.” It would be Albert Einstein, symbolic of science in the Century of Science. As a physicist, I was surprised, but ultimately sanguine, regarding Time’s choice. As Einstein once remarked, “Politics are temporary, but equations [describing the laws of nature] are forever.”

    Three of the foregoing finalists expressed private sentiments about Atatürk:
    “My sorrow is that, it is no longer possible to fulfill my strong wish to meet this great man.” — Franklin D. Roosevelt
    “The death of Atatürk, who saved Turkey during the war and revived the Turkish nation, is not only a loss for his country, but it is also a great loss for Europe…” — Winston Churchill
    “Your nation produced the greatest leader of the century!” — Albert Einstein. (To Turkish graduate student, Münir Ülgür, at Princeton. Helen Dukas, who served Einstein as his secretary for 25 years, also mentioned Einstein’s long held sentiment regarding Atatürk to me at the Institute for Advanced Study in 1974.) See also ”Einstein’s Letter to Ataturk’s Turkey”
    References and Acknowledgements:

    • Walter Cronkite, The Incredible Turk (in the series, the 20th Century, 1958).
    • Click on the following link to view the “lost wax method” employed in the Creation of the Atatürk Statue
    • Peace loving Turks in America can thank Hudai and Mirat Yavalar, Founders of the Ataturk Society of America, for commissioning the statue of Atatürk. I would strongly recommend a visit to the statue.

    Flanking the 6’7″ clay model of Atatürk’s statue from left to right: Sculptor Jeff Hall, Hudai and Mirat Yavalar (Founders of ASA), Bulent and Carol Jean Atalay at the artist’s studio.

    Keywords: Abraham Lincoln Albert Einstein Ataturk George Washington Gutzon Borglum Jeffery Hall Mandela Sheridan Circle Thomas Jefferson Washington

  • The Truth About Hair and Why Indians Would Keep Their Hair Long

    The Truth About Hair and Why Indians Would Keep Their Hair Long

    Bu bilgi Vietnam savaşından beri gizlenmiştir.
    Saç hakkındaki gerçek ve neden Kızılderililer saçlarını kesmezler

    United Truth Seekers

     black_elk_young_sm2
    © Black Elk

    This information about hair has been hidden from the public since the Viet Nam War .

    Our culture leads people to believe that hair style is a matter of personal preference, that hair style is a matter of fashion and/or convenience, and that how people wear their hair is simply a cosmetic issue. Back in the Vietnam war however, an entirely different picture emerged, one that has been carefully covered up and hidden from public view.

    In the early nineties, Sally [name changed to protect privacy] was married to a licensed psychologist who worked at a VA Medical hospital. He worked with combat veterans with PTSD, post traumatic stress disorder. Most of them had served in Vietnam.

    Sally said, “I remember clearly an evening when my husband came back to our apartment on Doctor’s Circle carrying a thick official looking folder in his hands. Inside were hundreds of pages of certain studies commissioned by the government. He was in shock from the contents. What he read in those documents completely changed his life. From that moment on my conservative middle of the road husband grew his hair and beard and never cut them again. What is more, the VA Medical center let him do it, and other very conservative men in the staff followed his example.

    As I read the documents, I learned why. It seems that during the Vietnam War special forces in the war department had sent undercover experts to comb American Indian Reservations looking for talented scouts, for tough young men trained to move stealthily through rough terrain. They were especially looking for men with outstanding, almost supernatural, tracking abilities. Before being approached, these carefully selected men were extensively documented as experts in tracking and survival.

    With the usual enticements, the well proven smooth phrases used to enroll new recruits, some of these Indian trackers were then enlisted. Once enlisted, an amazing thing happened. Whatever talents and skills they had possessed on the reservation seemed to mysteriously disappear, as recruit after recruit failed to perform as expected in the field.

    Serious causalities and failures of performance led the government to contract expensive testing of these recruits, and this is what was found.

    When questioned about their failure to perform as expected, the older recruits replied consistently that when they received their required military haircuts, they could no longer ‘sense’ the enemy, they could no longer access a ‘sixth sense’, their ‘intuition’ no longer was reliable, they couldn’t ‘read’ subtle signs as well or access subtle extrasensory information.

    So the testing institute recruited more Indian trackers, let them keep their long hair, and tested them in multiple areas. Then they would pair two men together who had received the same scores on all the tests. They would let one man in the pair keep his hair long, and gave the other man a military haircut. Then the two men retook the tests.

    Time after time the man with long hair kept making high scores. Time after time, the man with the short hair failed the tests in which he had previously scored high scores.

    Here is a Typical Test:

    The recruit is sleeping out in the woods. An armed ‘enemy’ approaches the sleeping man. The long haired man is awakened out of his sleep by a strong sense of danger and gets away long before the enemy is close, long before any sounds from the approaching enemy are audible.

    In another version of this test the long haired man senses an approach and somehow intuits that the enemy will perform a physical attack. He follows his ‘sixth sense’ and stays still, pretending to be sleeping, but quickly grabs the attacker and ‘kills’ him as the attacker reaches down to strangle him.

    This same man, after having passed these and other tests, then received a military haircut and consistently failed these tests, and many other tests that he had previously passed.

    So the document recommended that all Indian trackers be exempt from military haircuts. In fact, it required that trackers keep their hair long.”

    Comment:

    The mammalian body has evolved over millions of years. Survival skills of human and animal at times seem almost supernatural. Science is constantly coming up with more discoveries about the amazing abilities of man and animal to survive. Each part of the body has highly sensitive work to perform for the survival and well being of the body as a whole.The body has a reason for every part of itself.

    Hair is an extension of the nervous system, it can be correctly seen as exteriorized nerves, a type of highly evolved ‘feelers’ or ‘antennae’ that transmit vast amounts of important information to the brain stem, the limbic system, and the neocortex.

    Not only does hair in people, including facial hair in men, provide an information highway reaching the brain, hair also emits energy, the electromagnetic energy emitted by the brain into the outer environment. This has been seen in Kirlian photography when a person is photographed with long hair and then rephotographed after the hair is cut.

    When hair is cut, receiving and sending transmissions to and from the environment are greatly hampered. This results in numbing-out .

    Cutting of hair is a contributing factor to unawareness of environmental distress in local ecosystems. It is also a contributing factor to insensitivity in relationships of all kinds. It contributes to sexual frustration.

    Conclusion:

    In searching for solutions for the distress in our world, it may be time for us to consider that many of our most basic assumptions about reality are in error. It may be that a major part of the solution is looking at us in the face each morning when we see ourselves in the mirror.

    The story of Sampson and Delilah in the Bible has a lot of encoded truth to tell us. When Delilah cut Sampson’s hair, the once undefeatable Sampson was defeated.

    Reported by C. Young

    Comment: SOTT can’t confirm this story or the research it suggests took place, however, we have wondered on many occasions, what is the use of hair and why so many legends refer to hair as being a source of strength, from Samson, to Nazarenes, to the Long Haired Franks.
  • ‘The near future of Iraq is dark’: Warning from Muqtada al-Sadr – the Shia cleric whose word is law to millions of his countrymen

    ‘The near future of Iraq is dark’: Warning from Muqtada al-Sadr – the Shia cleric whose word is law to millions of his countrymen

    In a rare interview at his headquarters in Najaf, he tells Patrick Cockburn of his fears for a nation growing ever more divided on sectarian lines
    In a rare interview at his headquarters in Najaf, he tells Patrick Cockburn of his fears for a nation growing ever more divided on sectarian lines

    Patrick Cockburn

    The future of Iraq as a united and independent country is endangered by sectarian Shia-Sunni hostility says Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shia religious leader whose Mehdi Army militia fought the US and British armies and who remains a powerful figure in Iraqi politics. He warns of the danger that “the Iraqi people will disintegrate, its government will disintegrate, and it will be easy for external powers to control the country”.

    In an interview with The Independent in the holy city of Najaf, 100 miles south-west of Baghdad – the first interview Mr Sadr has given face-to-face with a Western journalist for almost 10 years – he expressed pessimism about the immediate prospects for Iraq, saying: “The near future is dark.”

    Mr Sadr said he is most worried about sectarianism affecting Iraqis at street level, believing that “if it spreads among the people it will be difficult to fight”. He says he believes that standing against sectarianism has made him lose support among his followers.

    Mr Sadr’s moderate stance is key at a moment when sectarian strife has been increasing in Iraq – some 200 Shia were killed in the past week alone. For 40 years, Mr Sadr and religious leaders from his family have set the political trend within the Shia community in Iraq. Their long-term resistance to Saddam Hussein and, later, their opposition to the US-led occupation had a crucial impact.

    Mr Sadr has remained a leading influence in Iraq after an extraordinary career in which he has often come close to being killed. Several times, it appeared that the political movement he leads, the Sadrist Movement, would be crushed.

    He was 25 in 1999 when his father, Mohammed Sadiq al-Sadr, a revered Shia leader, and Mr Sadr’s two brothers were assassinated by Saddam Hussein’s gunmen in Najaf. He just survived sharing a similar fate, remaining under house arrest in Najaf until 2003 when Saddam was overthrown by the US invasion. He and his followers became the most powerful force in many Shia parts of Iraq as enemies of the old regime, but also opposing the occupation. In 2004, his Mehdi Army fought two savage battles against American troops in Najaf, and in Basra it engaged in a prolonged guerrilla war against the British Army which saw the Mehdi Army take control of the city.

    The Mehdi Army was seen by the Sunni community as playing a central role in the sectarian murder campaign that reached its height in 2006-7. Mr Sadr says that “people infiltrated the Mehdi Army and carried out these killings”, adding that if his militiamen were involved in the murder of Sunnis he would be the first person to denounce them.

    For much of this period, Mr Sadr did not appear to have had full control of forces acting in his name; ultimately he stood them down. At the same time, the Mehdi Army was being driven from its old strongholds in Basra and Sadr City by the US Army and resurgent Iraqi government armed forces. Asked about the status of the Mehdi Army today, Mr Sadr says: “It is still there but it is frozen because the occupation is apparently over. If it comes back, they [the Mehdi Army militiamen] will come back.”

    In the past five years, Mr Sadr has rebuilt his movement as one of the main players in Iraqi politics with a programme that is a mixture of Shia religion, populism and Iraqi nationalism. After a strong showing in the general election in 2010, it became part of the present government, with six seats in the cabinet. But Mr Sadr is highly critical of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s performance during his two terms in office, accusing his administration of being sectarian, corrupt and incompetent.

    Speaking of Mr Maliki, with whom his relations are increasingly sour, Mr Sadr said that “maybe he is not the only person responsible for what is happening in Iraq, but he is the person in charge”. Asked if he expected Mr Maliki to continue as Prime Minister, he said: “I expect he is going to run for a third term, but I don’t want him to.”

    Mr Sadr said he and other Iraqi leaders had tried to replace him in the past, but Mr Maliki had survived in office because of his support from foreign powers, notably the US and Iran. “What is really surprising is that America and Iran should decide on one person,” he said. “Maliki is strong because he is supported by the United States, Britain and Iran.”

    Mr Sadr is particularly critical of the government’s handling of the Sunni minority, which lost power in 2003, implying they had been marginalised and their demands ignored. He thinks that the Iraqi government lost its chance to conciliate Sunni protesters in Iraq who started demonstrating last December, asking for greater civil rights and an end to persecution.

    “My personal opinion is that it is too late now to address these [Sunni] demands when the government, which is seen as a Shia government by the demonstrators, failed to meet their demands,” he said. Asked how ordinary Shia, who make up the great majority of the thousand people a month being killed by al-Qa’ida bombs, should react, Mr Sadr said: “They should understand that they are not being attacked by Sunnis. They are being attacked by extremists, they are being attacked by external powers.”

    As Mr Sadr sees it, the problem in Iraq is that Iraqis as a whole are traumatised by almost half a century in which there has been a “constant cycle of violence: Saddam, occupation, war after war, first Gulf war, then second Gulf war, then the occupation war, then the resistance – this would lead to a change in the psychology of Iraqis”. He explained that Iraqis make the mistake of trying to solve one problem by creating a worse one, such as getting the Americans to topple Saddam Hussein but then having the problem of the US occupation. He compared Iraqis to “somebody who found a mouse in his house, then he kept a cat, then he wanted to get the cat out of the house so he kept a dog, then to get the dog out of his house he bought an elephant, so he bought a mouse again”.

    Asked about the best way for Iraqis to deal with the mouse, Mr Sadr said: “By using neither the cat nor the dog, but instead national unity, rejection of sectarianism, open-mindedness, having open ideas, rejection of extremism.”

    A main theme of Mr Sadr’s approach is to bolster Iraq as an independent nation state, able to make decisions in its own interests. Hence his abiding hostility to the American and British occupation, holding this responsible for many of Iraq’s present ills. To this day, neither he nor anybody from his movement will meet American or British officials. But he is equally hostile to intervention by Iran in Iraqi affairs saying: “We refuse all kinds of interventions from external forces, whether such an intervention was in the interests of Iraqis or against their interests. The destiny of Iraqis should be decided by Iraqis themselves.”

    This is a change of stance for a man who was once demonised by the US and Britain as a pawn of Iran. The strength of the Sadrist movement under Mr Sadr and his father – and its ability to withstand powerful enemies and shattering defeats – owes much to the fact it that it blends Shia revivalism with social activism and Iraqi nationalism.

    Why are Iraqi government members so ineffective and corrupt? Mr Sadr believes that “they compete to take a share of the cake, rather than competing to serve their people”

    Asked why the Kurdistan Regional Government had been more successful in terms of security and economic development than the rest of Iraq, Mr Sadr thought there was less stealing and corruption among the Kurds and maybe because “they love their ethnicity and their region”. If the government tried to marginalise them, they might ask for independence: “Mr Massoud Barzani [the KRG President] told me that ‘if Maliki pushes on me harder, we are going to ask for independence’.”

    At the end of the interview Mr Sadr asked me if I was not frightened of interviewing him and would not this make the British Government consider me a terrorist? Secondly, he wondered if the British Government still considered that it had liberated the Iraqi people, and wondered if he should sue the Government on behalf of the casualties caused by the British occupation.

    independent.co.uk, 29 November 2013

  • Turkey seeks to lock in long-term security

    Turkey seeks to lock in long-term security

    By Soner Cagaptay, Saturday, November 9, 1:42 AM

    Soner Cagaptay is a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and the author of “The Rise of Turkey: The Twenty-First Century’s First Muslim Power.” He is on Twitter: @sonercagaptay.

    Two years ago, I argued in a Post op-ed that Turkey was pivoting toward the United States. This policy has not ushered in what Ankara wanted: American firepower to oust the Assad regime in Syria. And feeling alone, Turkey has started to seek other allies, including Beijing.

    When the Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power in 2002, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and other Turkish officials toyed with the idea of being a stand-alone actor in the Middle East. By 2011, they had realized that the Arab Spring would create long-term instability in their neighborhood and would position Iran against Turkey in Syria. Turkey adeptly pivoted toward the United States. The two nations worked with other countries to oust Moammar Gaddafi in Libya that year and, early on, coordinated policies against the Assad regime .

    Gallery

    Tom Toles goes global: A collection of cartoons about international news.

    Even more important for U.S.-Turkish relations, President Obama and Erdogan hit it off. The two leaders spoke often and were eager to listen to each other about Middle East issues. The convergence was so apparent that in September 2011 Turkey abandoned its rhetorical hedging that Iran “has the right to pursue nuclear energy research for peaceful purposes” and joined NATO’s missile defense shield.

    This is why Turkey’s recent announcement that it would buy air defense systems from China — a first for any NATO member — was a shock. If finalized, this deal would deal a serious blow to Turkey’s relations with the United States and with NATO, opening the alliance’s security umbrella to potential Chinese snooping.

    Two issues are driving Ankara’s pivot away from Washington. First, Turkey aspires to build its defense industry and has been disappointed that U.S. companies would not transfer technology in return for weapons purchases. Turkish officials see turning to China as a way to enhance their bargaining power with U.S. companies.

    Second, Turkey is signaling its disappointment with the Obama administration’s Syria policy — or lack thereof. Turkey has pursued regime change in Damascus since 2012, providing weapons and haven to the Syrian opposition. Ankara has tried to persuade Washington to join its efforts and significantly support the opposition. The United States has done neither.

    Turkey’s sense of abandonment was heightened in the aftermath of the chemical weapons deal U.S. and Russian officials brokered in September, which, in Turkish minds, provided a lifeline for the Assad regime.

    Turkey foresees two grave eventual­ities in Syria: an Iran-backed hostile rump state at its border — whose leaders will not forget Ankara’s support for the Syrian rebels — and al-Qaeda-controlled enclaves.

    Whichever way Syria goes, Turkish officials expect that the outcome is likely to be unfavorable for them and that they will need allies to mitigate the fallout.

    The Turkish government’s heavy-handed treatment of protesters this summer also affected the relationship. When the police cracked down on a small pro-environment gathering in Istanbul, millions of Turks took to the streets to demand respect for freedom of assembly and liberal democracy — and were met with a more violent government reaction. Before these protests, Erdogan and Obama chatted often. Since then, Washington has been mostly deaf to Turkish appeals on Syria.

    For the past decade, Turkey has been surrounded by mostly troubled neighbors. By comparison, it has looked like an island of stability. Istanbul’s financial markets have attracted international capital in excess of $40 billion annually, driving record-breaking growth. The Syrian civil war changes this context. With a weak and divided state next door and al-Qaeda at its border, Turkey’s image as the region’s stable nation is eroding, and its economic growth could be undermined. This could complicate, or even derail, Erdogan’s plans to run for president next year as he is likely to be elected again only if Turkey continues growing.

    So after failing to get a U.S. commitment on action in Syria, Turkey is flirting with the Chinese and, potentially, the Russians to lock in additional long-term security. Eyeing the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, Turkish officials could seek their own deal with Tehran over Syria. Turkey hosted the Iranian foreign minister in Ankara on Nov. 1, hinting at the end of a period of cold ties. Ankara is trying to ameliorate its relations with Iraq, which soured over Baghdad’s objection to warm ties between Turks and the Iraqi Kurds. Turkey needs Iraq, one of Syria’s other neighbors, as an ally to contain a Syrian meltdown if it cannot bring an end to the Assad regime.

    The honeymoon in U.S.-Turkish ties is over. Turkey is out to gather as many friends as it can line up in the Middle East. The United States might be just one of them.

    via Turkey seeks to lock in long-term security – The Washington Post.

  • Regional War Scenario. NATO-US-Turkey War Games Off the Syrian Coastline

    Regional War Scenario. NATO-US-Turkey War Games Off the Syrian Coastline

    According to Turkish press reports, Turkey’s High Command will be hosting NATO’S Invitex military exercise in the Eastern Mediterranean in a clear act of provocation directed against Syria.

    The Invitex-Eastern Mediterranean war games are scheduled from November 4 to 14.

    Deafening silence. Not a single Western media has reported on these war games.

    The official release by the TKS High Command suggests a war games scenario involving a regional war, under the assumption that the ongoing US-NATO-Israeli covert war on Syria could lead to military escalation. The countries considered to be a threat to Turkey and NATO are not mentioned.

    According to the press dispatch of the Turkish Armed forces, various types of naval operations are envisaged. While the word “war” is not mentioned, the  stated objective consists in the “handling of a regional crisis”, presumably through military rather than diplomatic means.

    Turkish frigate F-245 TCG Oruç Reis

    The focus is intended “to enhance co-operation and mutual training between participant countries.” Reading between the lines this suggests enhanced military coordination directed against potential enemy countries in the Middle East including Syria and Iran.

    “NATO, the U.S. Navy and the Turkish Navy-Air Force-Coast Guard platforms will participate in the exercise, a statement from Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) said Nov. 4.”(Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey)

    A significant deployment of both naval and air power is envisaged. According to the TKS communique, the participant units are:

    NATO SNMG-2 (three frigates), U.S. Navy (one frigate), Turkish Navy (three frigates, two corvettes, four fast attack boats, three submarines, two oilers, two patrol boats, one landing ship, one tug boat, one maritime patrol aircraft, five helicopters, one amphibious team, one Naval WMD Destroy Team, (Multi National Maritime Security Center of Excellence), Turkish Coast Guard (three Coast Guard Boats) and Turkish Air Force aircrafts. (Ibid)

    Frigates are used for amphibious operations and the landing of ground forces. To be noted, the war games include seven frigates, not to mention one landing ship, and an amphibious team.

    SNMG 2 refers to Standing NATO Maritime Group 2, NATO standing maritime Immediate Reaction Forces. SNMG 2 is “a multinational, integrated maritime force – made up of vessels from various allied nations, training and operating together as a single team”.The NATO member states involved in the war games was not disclosed.

    Of significance, these war games overlap with bilateral military exercises between Turkey and Jordan which include the participation of special forces from both countries.

    De Zeven Provinciën-class frigate (Netherlands) (right)

    These bilateral Turkey-Jordan war games have not been reported upon. They are scheduled to end on November 9. These bilateral military exercises are intent upon enhancing military cooperation between the two countries, both of which are using special forces in the training and hosting of rebel mercenaries.

    The objective of the war games is to threaten Syria.

    The two sets of war games will be coordinated.  What seems to be envisaged, in this regard, is a scenario of invasion of an unnamed enemy country from war ships stationed in the Eastern Mediterranean, supported by air power. This would be carried out in coordination with US-NATO and allied special forces on the ground operating out of Turkey and Jordan in support of Al Qaeda affiliated rebel forces.

    Amply documented,  Turkey and Jordan are supporting the influx of both mercenary and covert special forces including death squads into Syria, respectively on Syria’s Northern and Southern border.

    Is Russia threatened by these war game? Russia is an ally of Syria. It has a naval base in the Eastern Mediterranean operating out of the port of Tartus in Southern Syria.

    In a bitter irony, coinciding with the NATO Invitex military exercises, NATO is conducting large-scale war games in proximity of the Russian border. The Ukraine, which is not a NATO country is participating in these war games directed against Russia.

    “The military exercise, called Steadfast Jazz, will see the Western alliance put 6,000 of its soldiers, mariners and airmen through their paces in Poland and in the Baltic Sea region from 2 to 9 November. … ”

    Meanwhile,  the US threatens China as part of Obama’s Asian pivot: October 25-28, U.S. Navy Carrier Strike Group Five (America’s largest Strike Group) led by the The USS George Washington staged joint military exercises in the South China Sea.

    via Regional War Scenario. NATO-US-Turkey War Games Off the Syrian Coastline | Global Research.

  • Head Scarves in Turkey – NYTimes.com

    Head Scarves in Turkey – NYTimes.com

    To the Editor:

    The Turkish government’s lifting of the ban on head scarves in government offices (news article, Oct. 9) should not be taken as a sign of democracy, despite what Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan claims.

    Instead, it is another insidious step toward the Islamist state he desires and against the secular republic founded by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Don’t forget that Mr. Erdogan is the man who declared: “Democracy is like a streetcar. When you come to your stop, you get off.”

    Furthermore, this step diminishes rather than promotes the equal rights of women in that country. The wearing of Islamic head scarves in Turkey is quite a different thing from what it is in the United States, and American citizens and politicians should not so easily be deceived.

    CAROL DELANEY

    Providence, R.I., Oct. 9, 2013

    The writer, emerita professor of anthropology at Stanford University, has spent years doing research in Turkey.

    A version of this letter appears in print on October 14, 2013, on page A24 of the New York edition with the headline: Head Scarves in Turkey.

    via Head Scarves in Turkey – NYTimes.com.