From The Sunday Times, August 3, 2008
As a result, Turks know the commander of the armed forces has the fate of their nation in his hands every bit as much as any elected prime minister. So the appointment of a new chief of the general staff is always a The next chief of the armed forces is being chosen this weekend at Erdogan makes unity plea after bombings Turkey managed to step back from the brink of political chaos last Adding to the crisis, two senior retired generals are in jail pending To choose a new armed forces supremo and make other senior military The meeting started on Friday and will last four days. The name of He is widely expected to be General Ilker Basbug, commander of the Sandhurst-trained Basbug, 65, will have the top job for the next two For these reasons Basbug is almost certainly not the general Erdogan “Erdogan will find Basbug is a much more formidable opponent than his The prime minister has the constitutional authority to oppose “Erdogan is wary of Basbug and would have preferred to have appointed Last Wednesday Erdogan narrowly survived legal moves to ban him and After three days of deliberations, the 11 judges of Turkey’s The court punished Erdogan’s party for its Islamic tilt by cutting in The court had already overturned AKP efforts to lift a 1989 law that Erdogan’s secularist opponents, who dominate the military and In Turkey, the military has traditionally had multiple pressure Manipulating the civilian government, sometimes through thinly veiled However, Basbug is expected to be more effective in influencing The decision of the constitutional court not to ban Erdogan and his Erdogan is expected to start work on a new constitution, but the If he tries to go too far there is no doubt, regardless of the EU’s Turkey calls itself a democracy but the military has always hovered |
Category: Regions
-
`Ice warrior’ poised to repel rise of Islamic rule in Turkey …. Jon Swain
-
Obama is not the right candidate if you are focused on Turkish issues.
REPUBLICANS VS. DEMOCRATS –
From: aynur heller [aynurheller@yahoo.com]
REPUBLICANS VS. DEMOCRATS
Speaking of Obama, I’d like to share my experience with you.
Probably some of you have already experienced the same thing with Obama as I have.
I sent him two letters in the last past 6 months concerning Turkey’s dilemma
“the so-called genocide” .
However, two days ago, finally, I received a mail from him telling me how important his presidency would be for this country and asking me to support him by my contributions for his campaign by Aug.30th not mentioning anything on the genocide issue and nothing about Turkey, no concerns or whatsoever. All he is showing me is the ways of payment and he needs the money by Aug. 30th.
I figured this might give you or – Obama supporters- a little hint as to what kind of president he would be for US and what steps we, as the Turkish Americans, can take towards Turkey’s problems with him. It is outrageous!
Aynur
Subject: Republicans Vs. Democrats
I am writing under my fiancee’s name, who is Turkish. My name is Jeff and I am not Turkish but am very much in tune with issues facing Turkey today. She shares posts with me and I am often floored by the inane and ridiculous arguments that are made. Especially when it comes to Democrats vs Republicans.
Let’s start off by saying this; The United States is a democratic country. Turkey is a democratic country. Democrats are a democratic party and guess what? Republicans are a democratic party. Some of you can’t seem to comprehend that.
The US Democrat party has notoriously not supported Turkey in a political stance, on the Armenian issue and in military positioning. The Republicans have. The democrats have produced great Americans and political leaders such as Nancy Pelosi (hates Turkey, loves Armenians), Ted Kennedy (drunkard murderer) and many more people that have no integrity (Bill Clinton).
Let me pose this question to you. Who do you think was the greatest American President? Abraham Lincoln? Republican. Ronald Reagan? Republican.
JFK? Did not even complete a term in office Bill Clinton? Made a mockery of the greatest office in the world.
Ok ok…. I know some of you are thinking “What about Nixon?” Well he was an amazing leader who I think went insane.
The point is this… The fact that any of you are supporting the Democrat’s cause amazes me. Nancy Pelosi went out of her way to get Congress to recognize the Turkish / Armenian issue as a genocide.
How can a foreign country condemn another for something that occurred nearly one hundred years ago when that country was not even a country?
Turkey is a great and beautiful country and in some ways as diverse as the US.
Stop giving in to what the media feeds you and start really looking at the track record of our elected officals.
Thanks for reading.
Jeff Martens
-
Senate Confirms U.S. Envoy To Armenia
Monday 4, August 2008
The U.S. Senate confirmed the Bush administration’s nominee as ambassador to Armenian after a delay by lawmakers who were unhappy with White House policies on the country.
Lawmakers had delayed consideration of Marie Yovanovitch’s nomination to Armenia in a dispute over the U.S. refusal to label as genocide the World War I-era killings of huge numbers of Armenians. The issue had come up in the nominee’s confirmation hearings.
Armenian-American groups have sought to force the adminsitration to change its policy on the Armenian killings. The administration has avoided the word genocide out of concern of alienating its ally, Turkey.
Historians estimate that up to 1.5 million Armenians were killed, an event widely viewed by genocide scholars as the first genocide of the 20th century. Turkey denies that the deaths constituted genocide, saying the toll has been inflated, and that those killed were victims of civil war and unrest.
In August, the White House withdrew its nomination of career diplomat Richard Hoagland after Democratic Senator Robert Menendez held up his confirmation through a Senate procedure.
Hoagland’s predecessor, John Evans, reportedly had his tour of duty in Armenia cut short by the administration because, in a social setting, he referred to the killings as genocide. Armenian-American groups sought to prevent Hoagland’s nomination unless he made a clear statement affirming the genocide.
-
A Major Political Test for Iraq
Published: August 4, 2008
Since the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk has been a political tinderbox-in-waiting that was largely ignored as war-fighting took precedence. Now that violence is way down, Iraqi leaders have no excuse not to peacefully decide the city’s future. Their failure to do so has already raised tensions and could further shred Iraq’s fragile social fabric — and unleash more bloodshed.
Kurds who run the semiautonomous region of Kurdistan should not be allowed to unilaterally annex Kirkuk, which they regard as their ancient capital but is also home to Turkmen and Arabs. They were promised a referendum in the Iraqi Constitution, but no durable solution can result without the participation of all groups. Overconfident Kurds and their American supporters have not been looking seriously for compromise.
The problem came to a head two weeks ago when Iraq’s Parliament passed a law again postponing a referendum on Kirkuk (it was supposed to be held by the end of 2007). The law contained a measure diluting Kurdish power in the area’s provincial council.
The Kurds believe the referendum will endorse making Kirkuk and surrounding areas part of Kurdistan — giving them more oil revenue and furthering their goal of independence — while Turkmen and Arab leaders want the city to stay under the central government.
Kurdish parliamentarians boycotted the session, resulting in the election law being declared unconstitutional. Another session on Sunday dissolved without reaching a quorum; lawmakers were to try again on Monday.
The problem is not just with the Kirkuk referendum. If the Kurds continue to hold the election law hostage, provincial elections now expected in early 2009 will also be stymied. These elections are crucial to Iraq’s political stability and reconciliation efforts because they will give minority Sunni Arabs a chance to be in government for the first time since they boycotted the 2005 elections. Sunnis who played a key role fighting with American forces against Iraqi insurgents are already embittered by the failure of Iraq’s Shiite-dominated government to hire enough of them for promised security jobs.
Compromises on Kirkuk are theoretically possible, but only the U.N. seems to be seriously trying to find one. That’s baffling, since no one, other than the Iraqis, has more vested in keeping the lid on violence and on tension with Turkey and Iran than the United States.
Iraqis proved their post-Saddam political wheeling-and-dealing skills when they adopted budget, amnesty and provincial powers laws earlier this year. It’s worth testing whether horse-trading on the crucial but deadlocked oil law and other contentious issues like minority rights and redistribution of powers could produce a Kirkuk deal all ethnic communities could live with.
If Iraqi leaders cannot settle the matter, they might consider putting Kirkuk and its environs under United Nations administration as was done with Brcko after the Balkan wars. The imperative is to ensure that Kirkuk’s future is not drawn in blood.
-
Top of the Agenda: China Border Attack
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
– China border attack in Xinjiang highlights Olympic terror threat.
– Zawahiri rumors swirl; Pakistani Taliban denies reports.
– Zuma hearings open in South Africa.
– Attacks in Mogadishu break fragile calm.
Top of the Agenda: China Border AttackChinese state media report this morning that sixteen policemen have been killed in an attack on an outpost (Xinhua) in Xinjiang province in western China. Officials billed the incident, in which two assailants reportedly used grenades and knives, as a terrorist attack (BBC).
The attack highlights unrest in Xinjiang province, where some in the large Uighur Muslim community accuse the Chinese government of imperialist governance. A new CFR.org Backgrounder gives an in-depth look at political tensions in the province.
The incident also raises concerns about disruptions to the Beijing Olympic Games, which begin in four days. Local activist groups and Western human rights watchdogs have seized on the games to protest Chinese government positions on an array of issues, from the Tibet region to Chinese business interests with a Sudanese regime accused of rampant abuses in Darfur. The Guardian reports on a blog that Chinese officials are increasing security measures ahead of the games. The New York Times surveys the views of experts on the terrorist threat posed by various groups during the Olympics.
Background:
– This Backgrounder profiles the main Islamist separatist group in China’s Xinjiang region, the East Turkestan Islamic Movement.
– This Backgrounder looks at the many issues on which activist groups have used the Olympics to apply pressure to the Chinese government.
-
Turkey can bridge the US-Iran divide
By Manik Mehta, Special to Gulf News
Published: August 03, 2008, 23:35Turkey’s relations with the US went through a rollercoaster, last October, when the US Congress passed a resolution on Armenia, describing the killings of Armenians during the First World War in the Ottoman empire as “genocide”. This had angered Istanbul which was already riled by the war in Iraq from where the Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK) launched attacks on Turkey.
However, US-Turkish relations considerably improved, particularly after the warm welcome to Turkish President Abdullah Gul during his visit to Washington earlier this year. The ensuing strategic cooperation between the two sides is a manifestation of what Gul called a “new chapter” in bilateral relations.
Although Turkish public opinion is unfavourable against the US, the strategic cooperation has, meanwhile, resuscitated the relationship between the two Nato partners. Kurdish nationalism is Ankara’s Achilles’ heel; it has brought Turkey closer to Iran which has its own Kurdish problem and has found a common cause with Turkey. Additionally, both sides have a vibrant trading and economic relationship.
While critics fear that closer Turkish-Iranian ties will have ramifications for US-Turkish relations, others see an opportunity. Turkey’s close ties with Iran should be used to persuade the latter to renounce its nuclear programme which is causing a lot of concern to the US and, particularly, Israel which has been the target of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s belligerent outbursts.
US-Turkish contacts have recently intensified on Iran’s nuclear programme. President George W. Bush’s National Security Adviser, Stephen Hadley, met Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan in July in Ankara – just before Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki arrived in Turkey – to send, apparently, a carrot-and-stick message on Iran’s nuclear programme. Subsequently, US and Iranian representatives met, for the first time in three decades, at the six-nation meeting in Geneva to discuss Iran’s nuclear programme.
Indeed, Mottaki sounded unusually conciliatory, even calling the presence of Undersecretary of State William Burns, the third senior-most American diplomat, at the talks as “a new positive approach”. Turkey has apparently played a quiet role in Mottaki’s moderate reaction which was a far cry from Ahmadinejad’s fiery rhetoric. Though glaring fundamental differences between the two will persist, an atmospheric improvement, with some help from Turkey, could bring both sides on “talking terms”.
Iran’s testing of two separate rounds of long-range ballistic missiles in early July has also unnerved not only the United States and Israel, but also the Gulf Arab states. The missile firing was intended to send different messages to different audiences. The missile tests warn the West that Iran, which has strengthened its presence in the Strait of Hormuz, could target oil shipments from the Arabian Gulf ports and deal a crippling blow to the Western and also the oil-driven Arab economies.
They were also aimed to silence Iran’s domestic critics, frustrated with the regime’s ruinous economic policies, by whipping up nationalist fervour and take the wind out of the critics’ sail.
Rapprochement
According to some American strategists, Turkey would be willing to bring about the rapprochement between the US and Iran, and thus prevent a military conflict. On the other hand, the hardcore Iranian leadership would prefer making concessions on the nuclear issue to Muslim Turkey rather than directly to the US.
Indeed, some Americans argue that by allowing it a face-saving withdrawal, Iran could be persuaded to eventually abandon its nuclear programme. The Iranian people desperately want an end to the West-backed sanctions against their country which is treated like a pariah at every international venue because of their unpopular regime.
Indeed, the regime knows this and also the fact that it will not be able to stop for long the tide of public disenchantment with its dogmatic attitude. This is a good time for the US to take more Turkish help and resolve the stalemate with Iran.
Manik Mehta is a commentator on Asian affairs.
Source: Gulf News, August 03, 2008