Category: USA

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

  • NATO sets up missile defense shield in Turkey

    NATO sets up missile defense shield in Turkey

    The Patriot missile defense system is meant to protect Turkey, in case neighboring Syria launches an attack. But the area is too big for the existing missile defense shield – not all cities are covered.

    0,,16391560_401,00

    At the beginning of February 2013, German, Dutch and US patriot missiles are expected to be set up in southeastern Turkey, facing skywards. The sophisticated weapon systems are to deter possible missile attacks by Syria towards NATO ally, Turkey. The Germans are stationed in Kahramanmaras, the Dutch in the Mediterranean city of Adana and US troops in Gaziantep. Major cities like Diyarbakir or Batman lie outside the protection zone. The six patriot missiles will not suffice to effectively protect the 900 kilometer (560 miles) border with Syria.

    German Air Force spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Markus Werther stressed in an interview with DW that the decision regarding the German forces’ location had been made within NATO’s framework. There was close cooperation between all countries involved, he said.

    “Together with our partners, the Netherlands, the USA and Turkey, Germany decided to go to Kahramanmaras,” Werther added. On January 8th, 2013, the German armed forces, the Bundeswehr, began shipping the missiles.

    Turkish soldiers patrol in the Turkish town of Ceylanpinar near the strategic Syrian border town of Ras al-Ain on November 14, 2012. (Photo. BULENT KILIC/AFP/Getty Images) The situation on the Turkish-Syrian border has been tense for months

    Patriot stationing a symbolic act

    The missiles, with a range of 68 kilometers, are only able to protect a few cities in the south of the country. Michael Brtoska, Scientific Director of the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, sees the missile defense as a largely symbolic act.

    “The protection the missiles can theoretically offer against attacks from Syria is limited to small areas,” he explained.

    Large population centers do come within the protective zone. But more extensive protection is not possible with existing resources, Brzoska added.

    NATO patriot missiles have been stationed in Turkey before – during the Iraq wars in 1991 and 2003. When five people of Turkish nationality were killed in grenade attacks from the Syrian border in October 2012, Ankara called on NATO for support again. In early December 2012, the alliance gave its green light for the mission. Turkish media reported that Ankara had initially hoped for 18 to 20 systems along its southern border. But that would have meant that a considerable part of all existing patriot entities would have been deployed. Germany, the US and the Netherlands eventually offered to set up two systems each.

    Impossible to monitor no-fly-area

    Apart from threat analyses and logistical factors, the defensive character of the mission was a decisive factor when it came to choosing the location.

    “Most NATO member states were extremely concerned that the patriot missiles could also be used to target planes in the Syrian airspace,” said Brzoska.

    In early December, the German government stressed that the goal of the mission was not to set up or monitor a no-fly area above Syrian territory. NATO, which has the command for the mission, also confirmed the mission’s defensive character. Kahramanmaras and Adana are both 100 kilometers away from the border – too far to reach Syria. Similarly, if a US rocket was to be launched from Gaziantep, it would hardly reach Turkey’s neighbor in the south.

    Under motorcycle escort at the break of dawn Dutch Patriot defence missiles are transported from their base to the Eems harbor in Groningen. (Photo: EPA/Evert-Jan Daniels pixel) Patriot missiles on their way to Turkey in early January

    But the defense missiles can strengthen Turkish air raid defense systems.

    “In the unlikely case of Syria attempting to enter Turkish airspace with planes or even intermediate-range missiles, Turkish air raids alone would hardly be in a position to prevent that from happening,” Brzoska explained.

    Intermediate-range missiles in particular would overwhelm Turkish systems. The Syrian army has both intermediate-range missiles and chemical weapons. Neighboring countries are concerned that the government in Damascus could use these weapons as a last resort if threatened with defeat in the Syrian civil war.

    Ready within seconds after missile attack

    In the worst-case scenario, the patriot missiles could react instantly to approaching missiles, planes or drones. The airspace is monitored around the clock, said Lieutenant Colonel Werther. “In case of attack, which is still highly unlikely, the weapon system would stand ready for action within seconds,” he added.

    Brzoska sees no reason for the government in Damascus to launch attacks on Turkey. Under the conditions of the current mandate, he said, the risk for German soldiers to be involved in combat action is low.

    “Chances are very high that the soldiers are looking at a quiet time there,” Brzoska noted.

    via NATO sets up missile defense shield in Turkey | World | DW.DE | 20.01.2013.

  • MP takes trip to Turkey, visits refugee camps

    MP takes trip to Turkey, visits refugee camps

    Mississauga-Erindale MP Bob Dechert recently travelled to Turkey to meet with religious leaders and visit two Syrian refugee camps.

    Dechert in Turkey. Mississauga-Erindale MP Bob Dechert (left) and Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney visit a Syrian refugee camp in Turkey. Supplied photo
    Dechert in Turkey. Mississauga-Erindale MP Bob Dechert (left) and Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney visit a Syrian refugee camp in Turkey. Supplied photo

    Dechert, who also serves as parliamentary secretary to the minister of foreign affairs, joined Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney in meetings with Turkey’s chief rabbi, Rav Isak Haleva. He leads the 25,000 members of the Jewish community across the country.

    “It was an honour to be able to meet with such important and influential spiritual leaders in the region,” said Dechert in a release. “Our meetings in Turkey allowed us to demonstrate our government’s foreign policy emphasis on the protection and promotion of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law around the world.”

    Dechert also visited two Syrian refugee camps on his trip.

    “As the violence in Syria continues, the government of Turkey is doing a commendable job to help those who have been forced to flee their homes,” said Dechert. “I’m glad that I was able to see firsthand the work that is being done in Turkey and I’m also proud that our government has helped assist, through contributions to the Turkish Red Crescent, these meaningful and necessary projects.”

    via Mississauga Article: MP takes trip to Turkey, visits refugee camps.

  • US being petitioned to push Turkey to open border with Armenia for ethnic Armenians trapped in Syria

    US being petitioned to push Turkey to open border with Armenia for ethnic Armenians trapped in Syria

    4dggd55f

    © Collage: Voice of Russia

    The American White House internet site, or rather its section “We are citizens”, which collects signatures under various kinds of petitions, once again has become an arena for discussion of an absolutely non-American problem. One Armenian political scientist has announced that signatures were being collected under an appeal urging Washington to force Turkey to open the border with Armenia for the sake of the fleeing refugees from Syria. The Voice of Russia’s correspondent in the United States, Roman Mamonov, has tried to find out if there is any connection with America.

    Six hundred twenty-five signatures in nine days is a modest result (as of Monday morning) of the petition, posted on the White House site by Daniel Ioannisyan, member of the Heritage opposition party. In this short document (only 10 lines) he calls upon the US government to put pressure on Turkey so that it opens the border with Armenia for the free migration of refugees from Syria. According to Ioannisyan, more than 60 thousand people were killed since the beginning of the conflict in Syria, and half a million people were forced to flee the country. According to the politician, 200 thousand ethnic Armenians live in Syria, most of whom supposedly want to leave the war-stricken Republic and return to their homeland. But the Turkish-Armenian border, which has been closed since 1993, prevents them from doing so. And now Daniel Ioannisyan means to exert pressure on Ankara with the help of Washington. The petition ends with a dramatic phrase, “There should be no closed borders in the 21st century”.

    Even in Armenia, many responded with skepticism to this initiative. Firstly, the very idea of appealing to Washington from Yerevan in order to put pressure on Ankara because of the situation in Syria looks strange.

    Secondly, political analysts doubt that there are so many Armenians in Syria who are ready to abandon everything and fly away to their homeland. And the question remains whether Armenia is ready to welcome this number of migrants.

    Users (from any country of the world) have until February 4 to obtain 25 thousand signatures in order to make the US Administration respond to this appeal. But judging by the current trend, approximately 70 signatures a day, the document will not be sent to the White House, unless a miracle happens.

    It is noteworthy that foreign politicians have long used the “We are citizens” section of the White House website as a means of addressing Washington. At present, signatures are being collected under the appeal to stop trafficking of human organs in China, the appeal to stop the persecution of Shia Muslims in Pakistan, and the appeal to monitor the situation with political rights in Venezuela. There is also a petition with the request to recognize the genocide of the Sikhs in India in 1984.

    via US being petitioned to push Turkey to open border with Armenia for ethnic Armenians trapped in Syria: Voice of Russia.

  • Turkey’s big thirst for new power

    Turkey’s big thirst for new power

    Turkey’s big thirst for new power

    Florian Neuhof

    AD20130114647153-A_worker_checks

    Turkey is in a rush to grow its energy sector. And recent news that the Abu Dhabi National Energy Company, known as Taqa, will invest heavily in Turkish coal-fired power plants shows how serious Ankara is taking this commitment.

    The deal, announced at the start of the year, will see Taqa build and operate a power generation base totalling 7,000 megawatts, or about 10 per cent of Turkey’s electricity needs by the time the plants are completed.

    Turkey’s energy minister, Taner Yildiz, is keen to emphasise that efforts will be taken to minimise the environmental impact of the country’s power sector.

    The plants will be fed with lignite, a soft brown coal reviled by environmentalists for the emissions its use entails. Lignite is found in Turkey’s soil and offers some relief in the complicated task of securing hydrocarbons from abroad.

    Turkey is dependent on imports for 91 per cent of its oil and 98 per cent of its natural gas and it relies heavily on Iran and Russia for its supplies. It is therefore keen to push the share of electricity produced from gas from about 50 per cent to less than 30 per cent in the next decade and to diversify its hydrocarbon sources.

    Turkey has reluctantly complied with United States and European Union demands to reduce imports from Iran as part of a new round of sanctions, but its dependence on Iranian supply has meant it has refused to cut economic ties with the country.

    Nevertheless, Turkey has announced it will import more Saudi Arabian and Libyan crude to counter the effect of the sanctions on Iran and the trend for Arabian Gulf oil to depart to Asia.

    Turkey’s confrontational stance with Syria, Tehran’s long-time ally, could also endanger imports from Iran.

    Iraq’s immense oil and gas reserves are another source of hydrocarbons, and a pipeline already flushes 400,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Iraqi crude across the border to the Turkish harbour of Ceyhan. But, rather than focusing on good relations with Baghdad, Ankara seems intent on carving out its own oil and gas base in Iraq by encouraging the autonomous Kurdish north in its efforts to create an independent energy sector.

    The Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) and Turkey are close to signing a deal under which the Turks will build production and pipeline capacity in Kurdistan, enabling the Kurds to export their hydrocarbons outside the Iraqi infrastructure.

    The KRG’s efforts to take control of its resources is a huge source of irritation to Iraq’s central government. While closer ties with Erbil can serve to secure a great deal of oil and gas supply, the uncertainty of the geopolitics can also undermine future security of supply.

    Turkey pays attention to its gas supply in particular. With electricity use projected to rise dramatically in the coming decades, adding further gas imports is crucial in spite of efforts to reduce its share in power generation.

    But Turkey also has ambitions to establish itself as a gas-trading hub between the Middle East, gas rich Azerbaijan and Europe. Turkey and Azerbaijan have agreed on the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline project that will connect the latter’s Shah Deniz II gasfield development with the Bosphorus.

    Turkish demand for gas stood at about 125,000 cubic metres a day at the end of last year. Before it can think of gaining in status as a transit hub it needs to ensure its own demands are met, experts say.

    “It still needs to facilitate additional gas purchases and encourage new developments such as Shah Deniz Phase II and Kurdistan volumes to meet its own requirements,” says Stephen O’Rourke, a gas supply analyst at Wood Mackenzie.

    Although piped gas plays the biggest part in Turkey’s thinking, Ankara has remained open to all options. This month, Mr Yildiz announced that he was in discussions with Qatar over an import terminal for liquefied natural gas (LNG).

    Another future source of gas could be the Levant Basin, where huge reserves are believed to lie under the deep seabed. But Turkey’s confrontational stance towards Greece and its icy relations with Israel disadvantages Ankara’s position in the Mediterranean, in spite of an exploration agreement with North Cyprus.

    If the Levant Basin fulfils its potential and starts yielding large amounts of gas, it could threaten Turkey’s position as a transit hub, analysts predict, as the most direct route to Europe is via Greece. But gas produced there may not be destined to Europe, anyhow.

    “We expect LNG to be the most likely export monetisation solution for these discoveries, and consequently Europe is not a guaranteed market for this gas,” says Mr O’Rourke.

    Overall, Turkey remains in a strong position to secure the gas necessary for its economic growth and to make it a significant regional hub.

    “Turkey should be able to maintain its long-term energy objectives. However, this will become more complicated, given its increasingly complicated relationships with Syria, Iran, Cyprus, and Israel,” says Daniel Wagner, the chief executive of the consultancy Control Risk Solutions.

    via Turkey’s big thirst for new power – The National.

  • Syria Civil War: U.S. Troops in Turkey Could Be Start Of Intervention

    Syria Civil War: U.S. Troops in Turkey Could Be Start Of Intervention

    American soldiers are on their way to Turkey to precariously close locations to the Turkish-Syrian border. While the official explanation is that it is for the protection of Turkey (a fellow NATO member) amid Syria’s ongoing civil war, some are skeptical about the claim, and think something more may be occurring — for all the right reasons.

    photo

    Four hundred U.S. soldiers are being sent to man the anti-missile batteries along the Turkish-Syrian border. Whether it truly is for defensive purposes or for an impending conflict, there are a few issues that should be discussed beforehand.

    First and foremost, Turkey itself is an issue. Geopolitically, having Turkey in NATO provides the organization with a strategic foothold in the Middle East. Turkey is also a perennial EU hopeful that for the past 40 years consistently fails to meet EU requirements, and will probably never attain EU membership. Like a good NATO member, Turkey’s government, headed by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, had some very harsh words for the Syrian government and accused President Bashar al-Assad of “attempted genocide.”

    The hypocrisy of such an accusation, however, is unknown to some. Turkey, and its predecessor state, the Ottoman Empire, had managed to go through with no less than three genocides in the past century. Pontic Greeks, Assyrians, and Armenians were all but virtually wiped out, while the Turkish state adamantly refuses to admit they had any direct involvement. Twenty-one countries have recognized the Armenian massacres as genocide, while the U.S. Government has failed to do so as to not hamper relations with Turkey, despite 43 U.S. states recognizing the genocide. The Kurds also deserve an honorable mention as a group that have been persecuted on-and-off for the past century, while other ethnic and religious minorities such as the Alevis face occasional attacks.

    Something like that cannot be overlooked. Assuming there is a genocide occurring (and history shows these assumptions can be wrong, e.g. Kosovo), at what price do we intervene to put a halt to the human rights violations? If those troops in Turkey are just a build-up for something much bigger, then how can we ignore Turkey’s consistent gross human rights record, and use its convenient geographic location as a launchpad into Syria?

    Going back to the issue of whether it is to defend Turkey or launch an attack, it is probably the latter. Turkey, being a NATO member, is guaranteed by the NATO charter that any attack on them is an attack on NATO, and consequently all other member states. Whether Turkey would be able to handle it themselves (and they would be), is then irrelevant. However, would Syria even attack Turkey? Other than stray missiles, the chances of Syria attacking Turkey are very low. It would be very strange for a state that is on the brink of collapse, with the central government losing control, to attack a neighboring state.

    When looking at the picture as a whole, defending Turkey seems to appear more an excuse to begin an intervention in Syria. Turkey’s involvement in the compassionate “We need to champion human rights” discourse is a mockery to the very principle. The West must also take into account the Vietnam scenario, and the lesser discussed Lebanon civil war that NATO had to pull out of during Reagan’s administration. Let’s not forget, Iran is a player in the Syrian fiasco as well, and it seems that the U.S. is merely buying time until their intervention is a “secure” one.

    via Syria Civil War: U.S. Troops in Turkey Could Be Start Of Intervention.

  • Turkey-US Ties ‘Closer Than Ever’ Says Turkish Ambassador Tan

    Turkey-US Ties ‘Closer Than Ever’ Says Turkish Ambassador Tan

    By: Semih Idiz for Al-Monitor Turkey Pulse. posted on January 8.
    U.S. Secretary of State Clinton and Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu attend a news conference
    US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (L) and Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu attend a news conference after their meeting in Istanbul August 11, 2012. (photo by REUTERS/Osman Orsal)

    The Pew Research Center indicates that Turks are still among the world champions in anti-Americanism. Pew’s “Global Attitude Project” for 2012 showed that 72% of Turks rated the US unfavorably, while only 15% rated it favorably. Only Pakistan and Jordan, out of a list of 20 countries, proved worse than Turkey in this respect.

    About This Article

    Summary :

    Semih Idiz writes that Ankara is pleased with the nomination of Chuck Hagel as secretary of defense and US-Turkish relations are stronger than ever, despite some friction over Turkish trade with Iran.

    Author: Semih Idiz
    posted on : January 8 2013

    It’s easy to conclude then that there is little hope for Turkish-US ties to develop further, even if they have maintained their military alliance for the sake of practical reasons. And yet the two countries are seen to be enjoying one of the best periods ever in their bilateral ties, according to Turkey’s ambassador to Washington, Namik Tan.

    “During this last period we have come closer than ever in Turkish-American relations. Our ties have broadened, diversified and deepened. There is a very close personal relationship between our leaders,” Tan said in an interview with Hurriyet earlier this week.

    Adding that the re-election of President Barack Obama provided “a second window of opportunity” for ties, Tan said, “We do not have to rediscover each other.” He also noted that “a country that does not maintain good ties with America will fall back in the international arena in terms of its interests.”

    This is a far cry from the days of President George W. Bush, when Turkey angered Washington in March 2003, after its parliament failed to endorse a bill that would have enabled US forces to invade Iraq from Turkish territory.

    Turkish public opinion in turn, went ballistic when it emerged that US marines, with little love lost for Turkey due to the decision by its parliament a few months earlier, arrested 11 members of the Turkish armed forces in a raid on their headquarters in the Northern Iraqi city of Sulaymaniyah in July 2003.

    The fact that Turkish soldiers were manhandled and treated like Iraqi insurgents, with sacks over their heads — resulting in the whole affair being known as the “Sack Incident” in Turkey — turned into a matter of national honor, putting a great strain on ties with Washington.

    Those arrested — and subsequently released after the outcry in Turkey — were accused of planning to create turmoil in the region by setting off car bombs and assassinating Kurdish officials. These charges were strongly denied by Ankara, and the whole incident still remains shrouded in mystery.

    Given that the military alliance between the two countries goes back half a century, ties were not severed over this incident. But the atmosphere remained frosty, to say the least, and worsened after Washington’s “neocons” started accusing Turkey of moving toward radical Islam under the Justice and Development Party.

    Things started improving following Barack Obama’s election in November 2008, especially after he made one of his first overseas visits to Turkey in April 2009, during which he was warmly greeted by the government and the Turkish parliament, which he addressed.

    In the meantime, developments in the Middle East, especially after the outbreak of the Arab Spring, further cemented this relationship, leading to the current state of affairs that Ambassador Tan is so cheerful about.

    Ankara is also happy today about President Obama’s choice of John Kerry for Secretary of State and Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense. Both are known to have a keen awareness of Turkey’s growing regional and global importance. Hagel is especially appreciated for his highly laudatory remarks in the past on Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the Turkish Republic, whose legacy he believes should be taught in US schools.

    Ankara has also noted Hagel’s approach to the 1915 massacre of Armenians under the Ottomans, which many in the US Congress have tried repeatedly to have listed as “genocide,” a possibility that risks poisoning US-Turkish ties like no other issue.

    His “leave history to the historians” attitude on this matter is in tune with the official Turkish thinking. Neither has his past criticism of Israel gone unnoticed in Ankara, which is currently seriously at odds with Israel over the Palestinian issue.

    None of this means, however, there are no points of contention between Ankara and Washington. Ambassador Tan is the first to admit this, although he is quick to point out that these differences are not substantive, but merely stem from a different prioritization of issues important to both countries.

    On Syria, for example, the sides have established close coordination and their approaches to the crisis are almost identical. Ankara, nevertheless, expects Washington to be more active in trying to topple the Bashar al-Assad regime. This, however, does not mean Turkey is looking for a US-led military intervention in Syria, as Tan explained to Hurriyet, which makes the question of what it is that Ankara expects even more intriguing.

    Differences on Iraq, however, are more apparent. Washington worries that Turkey’s increasingly bad relations with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki, and rapidly developing economic and political ties with the Kurdish Regional Government, taking place over Baghdad’s head, risk dividing Iraq. Tan, however, is quick to respond to this charge.

    “So what are their [the US’] companies, which number over 40, doing there? Any company you can think of is there, but when it comes to my companies, they should not be. This is not a convincing approach.”

    According to press reports, Ambassador Feridun Sinirlioglu, the undersecretary of the Turkish Foreign Ministry, is expected in Washington soon for talks with his US counterpart, William Burns, aimed at, among other things, ironing out differences over Iraq.

    Then, there is the question of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). Turkey acknowledges it is getting assistance from the US against this group, which both countries designate as terrorist, especially in terms of real-time intelligence, but insists that this is not enough. It wants more direct involvement by American forces against this group lodged in the mountains of Northern Iraq, which Washington has been reluctant to do.

    In the meantime, US Ambassador to Ankara Francis Riccardione has taken issue on more than one occasion with repeated claims by Turkish officials that his country is not doing enough against PKK terrorism. Indicating that Washington is giving far more assistance than it is credited with, Riccardione has openly expressed annoyance over these Turkish claims.

    Finally, there is the matter of Turkish-Israeli ties, with Ankara expressing anger over US support for Israel, especially in the May 2010 incident involving the Mavi Marmara, a Turkish ship that was part of an international aid flotilla headed for besieged Gaza when it was boarded by Israeli forces, who killed nine Turkish activists, claiming they were armed and aggressive.

    Washington has been pressuring Turkey to normalize ties with Israel, which Ankara has refused to do until that country apologizes for the Mavi Marmara raid, compensates the families of the deceased and lifts the siege on Gaza, none of which has happened yet.

    Developments in the Middle East, however, are ensuring that these as well as other similar differences, including the issue of Turkey’s trade with Iran, do not overshadow military and political ties between Ankara and Washington, which appear set to deepen even further, despite the rampant anti-Americanism in Turkey.

    Semih İdiz is a contributing writer for Al-Monitor’s Turkey Pulse. A journalist who has been covering diplomacy and foreign-policy issues for major Turkish newspapers for 30 years, his opinion pieces can be followed in the English-language Hurriyet Daily News. His articles have been published in The Financial Times, The Times, Mediterranean Quarterly and Foreign Policy magazine, and he is a frequent contributor to BBC World, VOA, NPR, Deutche Welle, various Israeli media organizations and Al Jazeera.

    Read more: https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2013/01/turkey-chuck-hagel.html#ixzz2HV8R0I00