Turkish Forum

Tag: NATO missile shield

  • Proposed NATO defense shield in Turkey highly suspicious

    Proposed NATO defense shield in Turkey highly suspicious

    Proposed NATO defense shield in Turkey highly suspicious: Iran

    Tehran Times Political Desk

    Mehmanparast

    TEHRAN – A proposal by NATO to establish a new ballistic missile defense shield in Turkey is “seriously suspicious”, the Iranian Foreign Ministry announced on Tuesday.

    “We think NATO’s aim to deploy military forces in the region is seriously suspicious,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told a weekly press briefing.

    Mehmanparast added, “We think the stationing of NATO military forces would disrupt security in the region.”

    He went on to say that the regional countries are able to maintain their own security and “they have no need to foreigners”.

    At a meeting last week, NATO members discussed a proposal presented by the United States to establish a new ballistic missile defense shield in Turkey.

    Turkish officials say they will analyze and deliberate on all the possible outcomes and implications of the proposed plan before reaching a decision.

    Iran confirms financial assistance to Afghanistan

    After President Hamid Karzai admitted receiving aid from Iran a Foreign Ministry official in Tehran confirmed that the Islamic Republic gives aid to Afghanistan in reconstructing the war-ravaged country.

    “The Islamic Republic of Iran, as a neighboring country is deeply concerned about Afghanistan’s stability, and has given much assistance for the reconstruction of Afghanistan,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters.

    “The Islamic Republic of Iran has done its part in helping Afghanistan rebuild and develop its economy and will do so in the future,” Mehmanparast explained.

    Karzai insisted at a news conference in Kabul on Monday that the payments to his chief of staff were transparent payments for his presidential office.

    The New York Times reported on Saturday that Karzai’s chief of staff, Umar Daudzai, received regular cash payments from Iran.

    Karzai angrily denied that the payments were secret.

    Cash payments “are done by various friendly countries to help the president’s office… this is transparent,” Karzai said Monday, according to AFP.

    “This is nothing hidden. We are grateful for Iranian help in this regard. The United States is doing the same thing. They’re providing cash to some of our offices.”

    He said Iran has assisted his government with up to 700,000 euros once or twice a year in the form of official aid.

    “He (Daudzai) is receiving the money on my instructions,” he added

  • Turkish ‘no’ to missile defense could spell crisis with West, says expert

    Turkish ‘no’ to missile defense could spell crisis with West, says expert

    A planned missile shield for Europe could deter Iran from pursuing its contentious nuclear and missile programs and Turkey’s refusal to join the US-backed defense system would put its ties with the West at risk, according to an expert on nuclear diplomacy.

    Mark Fitzpatrick
    Mark Fitzpatrick

    The missile defense system proposal, which has been embraced by other members of NATO, presents Turkey with a difficult task of balancing between neighboring Iran and its North Atlantic allies. The possibility that the flourishing trade with Iran will be harmed amid political tensions over the missile shield is only one concern for the Turkish government. On a broader policy level, Ankara fears a missile defense system deployed in the Turkish territory against Iran would turn Turkey into a target, radicalize Iran and thus further destabilize the region and undermine its policy of “zero problems” with neighbors. But a refusal to join the system is likely to deepen a skepticism that has been simmering in the US and Europe since Turkey’s vote against sanctions on Iran at the UN Security Council over Ankara’s commitment to Western policy goals.Mark Fitzpatrick, a former US diplomat and an Iran expert at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), said a Turkish “no” to US requests for the deployment of elements of the planned missile shield on its soil could have more far-reaching consequences than the vote against sanctions at the Security Council.“This is not just a temporary issue,” Fitzpatrick said in an interview with Sunday’s Zaman this week. “This has long-term implications. If Turkey refuses to deploy elements of the defense system this would spell a longer-term disengagement from Europe.” Turkey, in talks with the US, insists that Iran should not be mentioned as a threat in the missile defense system, despite US statements that it is directly aimed at Tehran. Speaking after talks between Turkish and US defense and foreign ministers in Brussels earlier this month, Philip J. Crowley, spokesman for the US State Department, said the basis of the proposed system is “expressly to address the emerging missile threat from Iran.”

    Turkey will soon have to make up its mind as NATO says it wants to finalize plans during its upcoming summit on Nov. 19-20. Officials from both the US and Turkey have denied any pressure from Washington on Ankara to agree to missile shield requests.

    Fitzpatrick, who previously served as deputy assistant secretary of state for non-proliferation, said the missile defense system could deter Iran from developing nuclear weapons — because Iran will know that even if it has nuclear weapons one day, it will not be able hit any target — and thus will help ease tensions over Iran’s nuclear program in the long run. But in the short run, Turkish participation in the system will cause problems in Ankara-Tehran ties. “Iranians would feel that they thought they had a reliable friend in Turkey but Turkey is not a reliable friend. In this sense, it could create some tensions between Turkey and Iran,” he said.

    Turkey has long insisted on a negotiated settlement to the deepening crisis over Iran’s nuclear program and joined forces with Brazil to broker a deal with Tehran in May under which Iran agreed to send a portion of its low-enriched uranium abroad in return for higher-enriched uranium to be used as fuel in a research reactor. That deal failed, as the US quickly dismissed it as insufficient and pushed for sanctions at the UN Security Council.

    War in a year?

    Although the door is still open for a negotiated solution, Fitzpatrick said this might be difficult to achieve as Iran refuses to give up its ability to be able be produce nuclear weapons when necessary and Israel is growing increasingly impatient about the threat from Iran. He said the Western bloc will be in a “kind of cold war” with Iran which may erupt into a hot war in the next one or one-and-a-half years.

    “I am worried that Iran will just pretend to be engaged in negotiations, not really make a significant offer. Meanwhile it will continue to increase the amount of low-enriched uranium to the point where some other country — Israel — will say it is too much and decide military action is necessary,” he said. Iran’s current low-enriched uranium stockpile stands at 3,000 kilograms, according to Fitzpatrick, an amount sufficient to produce two nuclear weapons. If this stockpile increases further to become enough for the production of four to five weapons, or Iran continues its enrichment program, Israel would think it is too much and could thus attack. The conflict could then spill over as Iran retaliates and the US steps in to defend Israel.

    Fitzpatrick said talks that would lead to a peaceful settlement could begin on the basis of a modified version of the May 17 deal Iran signed with Turkey and Brazil. He said Turkey and Brazil deserve credit for persuading Iran to agree to drop an earlier condition that the uranium exchange should be simultaneous but said the deal otherwise failed to address many important concerns in the West.

    “I hope the deal can be renegotiated, maybe with Turkey’s participation and hopefully this could provide a peaceful solution to a growing problem,” he said. The former US diplomat also said Iran’s intentions in enriching uranium and developing its nuclear-capable missile program look suspicious, although Iran denies any intention to develop nuclear weapons and says its nuclear program is for peaceful ends. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has repeatedly said that countries are allowed to acquire nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

    “Iran’s missile program is nuclear capable. The missiles can reach more than 2,000 kilometers. No country has developed missiles with this range without also producing nuclear weapons,” Fitzpatrick said.
    24 October 2010, Sunday
    FATMA DEMIRELLI İSTANBUL
  • Analysis: Turkey hesitates on missile defense

    Analysis: Turkey hesitates on missile defense

    By DESMOND BUTLER
    The Associated Press

    Thursday, October 21, 2010; 3:15 AM

    In this Oct. 18, 2010, photo, Defense Secretary Robert Gates speaks at the American-Turkish Council's 29th annual conference on U.S.-Turkey relations, Monday, Oct. 18, 2010, in Washington. Gates said this week at the conference on U.S.-Turkish relations that the United States is not pressuring Turkey on the missile defense issues. Still, a Turkish refusal of the radar or problems negotiating the NATO statement could spike tensions.(AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais) (Pablo Martinez Monsivais - AP)
    In this Oct. 18, 2010, photo, Defense Secretary Robert Gates speaks at the American-Turkish Council's 29th annual conference on U.S.-Turkey relations, Monday, Oct. 18, 2010, in Washington. Gates said this week at the conference on U.S.-Turkish relations that the United States is not pressuring Turkey on the missile defense issues. Still, a Turkish refusal of the radar or problems negotiating the NATO statement could spike tensions.(AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais) (Pablo Martinez Monsivais – AP)

    WASHINGTON — Turkey finds itself once again in an awkward position between fellow NATO members and Iran as it considers a proposal to place a key component of a U.S. missile defense system on its soil.

    Depending on how it is resolved, the issue could heighten or quell concerns in Washington that Turkey is drifting away from the West.

    The U.S. would like Turkey to host a radar installation for its European missile shield and to back a proposal to make missile defense a core mission for NATO. After initial enthusiasm about the radar, Turkey has hesitated. Its main concern is that it does not want the missile defense system to explicitly target Iran. Turkey also doesn’t want NATO to go on record at its summit in Lisbon, Portugal, Nov. 19-21, identifying Iran as a ballistic missile threat.

    But U.S. and NATO officials have clearly identified Iran as the most immediate threat, even pegging the timing of building a missile defense to projected advances in Iran’s missile capabilities. And Turkey offers an advantage over other U.S. allies for the placement of the system’s radar: its proximity to Iran.

    Turkey has an interest in not alienating Tehran. It is increasingly dependent on Iranian energy resources and eager to expand trade. But the relatively close relationship with Iran has been an irritant to Washington. A last-minute nuclear-fuel swap deal with Tehran brokered by Turkey and Brazil ahead of a United Nations Security Council vote on sanctions in June was swiftly rejected, and U.S. officials reacted with anger when Turkey voted against the sanctions.

    The disagreement has bolstered doubt about Turkey’s commitment to Western institutions at a time when its bid for membership in the European Union has stalled. With a booming economy and growing regional clout, Turkey has been cultivating its ties to neighboring countries and powers outside the West.

    Turkey says the concerns reflect a misunderstanding. It says its relations with Europe and the United States won’t suffer as it expands its influence in other directions, and it has sought to position itself as a broker between the West and the Middle East. Turkish officials argue that their country’s ties with Tehran provide unique influence that the West should make use of.

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates said this week at a conference on U.S.-Turkish relations that the United States is not pressuring Turkey on the missile defense issues. Still, a Turkish refusal of the radar or problems negotiating the NATO statement could cause tensions to spike. Both sides say they are looking for a solution.

    “We do want to reach a deal,” Selim Yenel, deputy undersecretary in the Turkish Foreign Ministry, said in an interview. “We don’t want any problems at the NATO summit. It should be finalized by then.”

    A solution could involve playing down any mention of Iran as the motivation for building a missile defense system. With anger at Iran running high in the United States, however, the Obama administration may find that an uncomfortable compromise.

    EDITOR’S NOTE – Desmond Butler covers foreign affairs for The Associated Press.

    The Washington Post

  • Turkey Maintains Reservations About US Missile Defense

    Turkey Maintains Reservations About US Missile Defense

    Turkey Maintains Reservations About US Missile Defense

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 7 Issue: 190

    October 21, 2010 02:11

    By: Saban Kardas

    Turkey’s position on US efforts to create a ballistic missile defense (BMD) system in Europe has emerged as another source of tension in US-Turkish relations. The Bush administration originally contemplated the installment of a missile shield in Eastern Europe, yet failed to achieve its stated objectives in the face of strong Russian opposition. At the time, Turkey expressed a cautious position on such proposals, arguing that it should not proceed in a manner threatening to Russia. Recently, the Obama administration revived the idea as a central component of its policy of containing the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear program.

    Turkey has been considered as a possible location for the system, possibly hosting a radar battery on its soil, which would detect missiles launched from its surrounding regions so that they could be intercepted by missiles stationed in Turkey or Eastern Europe. The US also moved to present the revamped program as a joint NATO project, in obvious attempts to garner wider diplomatic support, and perhaps ease Ankara’s concerns. However, given Turkey’s position on the Iranian nuclear issue, which already had pitted it against the US, Ankara has remained lukewarm towards invitations from Washington to join the project. The recent trend in Turkish foreign policy towards pursuing independent policies and growing questions as to whether it is still committed to the Alliance and its traditional relations with the US has made Turkey’s position all the more puzzling.

    This issue has been at Turkey’s doorsteps visibly at least since Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, visited Turkey in early September (EDM, September 8). Similarly, during his visit to Turkey in early October, NATO Secretary-General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, discussed this issue (www.cnnturk.com, October 8). Ankara’s position was again one of the main items when NATO foreign and defense ministers met on October 14 in Brussels to discuss the Alliance’s new strategic concept, which will be adopted at the NATO summit in Lisbon next month. Rasmussen urged alliance members to consider the proposal for adopting a missile shield seriously against threats from rogue states, as underlined in the draft strategic concept.

    In Brussels, Turkish foreign and defense ministers, Ahmet Davutoglu and Vecdi Gonul, respectively, held a separate meeting with their US counterparts Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates. They conveyed Turkish concerns, especially its uneasiness with the proposed system being perceived as targeting Iran and Syria. They emphasized that the project must proceed as a defensive system, without designating any country as a potential aggressor. Otherwise, it could make these countries feel encircled and heighten tensions in the region. Turkey also reportedly expressed its desire to place the system under NATO’s command, and have it cover the entire territory of NATO members. Regarding the use of Turkish territory as a possible site for the system, the Turkish side apparently maintained its reservations (Dogan, October 14; Cihan, October 16).

    Speaking to reporters upon his return to Turkey, Gonul, however, did not rule out Turkey’s participation. Gonul rejected labeling Turkey’s stance as simply putting up objections, noting that the two sides were negotiating, which will continue until the Lisbon summit. Interestingly, Gates also denied speculation that the US was pressuring Turkey and said they were simply continuing negotiations with an ally. Gonul preferred to highlight the potential benefits of the missile shield for Turkey’s own security. Referring to some smaller scale defense systems Turkey is undertaking, Gonul maintained that if a future NATO missile shield also covers Turkey, it might help the country save huge costs (Zaman, October 16, October 17).

    Gonul apparently sees some opportunity for Turkey to participate in the missile shield project, since most of the costs would be borne by the United States. Turkey has considered missile defense systems since the 1990’s, but has failed to build an operational system, given its inability to shoulder the enormous costs of such a project and its limited technological know-how. One Turkish defense expert, Mustafa Kibaroglu, stressed that Turkey might opt to benefit from this project by seeking to gain a say in the decision making processes of the system and sharing technological expertise (Hurriyet Daily News, October 20).

    During his trip to the US where he attended the 29th annual American-Turkish Council (ATC) conference in Washington, Gonul, accompanied by Turkish government officials and diplomats, continued the talks on the issue with their American counterparts. “Contrary to some press reports, we are not pressuring Turkey to make a contribution. But we do look to Turkey to support NATO’s adoption at the Lisbon summit of a territorial missile defense capability,” Gates said, underscoring the ongoing difficulties in bridging the differences of opinion (Today’s Zaman, October 20).

    Unlike Davutoglu, who has been the architect of Turkey’s controversial Iran policy, Gonul might be less concerned about Turkey’s Iran portfolio and more sympathetic to the idea of benefiting from the missile shield project. Nonetheless, Ankara’s reservations over the ramifications of the project for its relations with its neighbors still run deep. Davutoglu has emphasized on many occasions that Turkey does not perceive any threats from the Middle East, and recently added that regional countries do not pose a threat to NATO, either (www.cnnturk.com, October 20).

    Turkey might increasingly find itself between a rock and a hard place. Irrespective of whether NATO designates any targets, Iran, whom the US has already dubbed as a “rogue state,” might nonetheless perceive the missile shield as a threat. Turkey, thus, will find it hard to explain its support for the missile shield to its Middle Eastern neighbors, especially as it pursues a “zero problems with neighbors” policy and forges deeper regional integration in the Middle East. In contrast, given the deep-running problems currently bedeviling US-Turkish relations, caused by the row over the Iranian nuclear issue and Turkey’s disputes with Israel, Turkey might not afford to be the deal-breaker at NATO. Ankara already sparked the ire of the US and other NATO members, when it contemplated vetoing Rasmussen’s election last year (EDM, April 6, 2009).

    Nonetheless, it may still be too early to determine the conditions under which Turkey could give its consent. Indeed, Turkey might prefer to continue “negotiations” on this issue until the Lisbon summit, and perhaps beyond.

    https://jamestown.org/program/turkey-maintains-reservations-about-us-missile-defense/

  • US wants backing on missile shield plans, Turkey insists on terms

    US wants backing on missile shield plans, Turkey insists on terms

    gonul vecdiTurkey has insisted that a planned NATO anti-missile system should not be perceived as a threat against any of its eastern neighbors with which its economic and political relations have particularly flourished in the last few years, while US authorities called on Ankara to approve hosting a part of the Europe-wide shield.

    Speaking at panel discussions held as part of the two-day 29th Annual American-Turkish Council (ATC) Conference in Washington on Monday, Turkish Minister of Defense Vecdi Gönül and US Defense Secretary Robert Gates both said the talks over the proposed missile shield are continuing on the basis of mutual trust and dialogue as two allies. “Contrary to some press reports, we are not pressuring Turkey to make a contribution. But we do look to Turkey to support NATO’s adoption at the Lisbon summit of a territorial missile defense capability,” Gates said, addressing the high-profile audience of politicians and businessmen from both sides on Monday in the US capital.

    Amid these calls from the US for approval, Turkey is particularly seeking guarantees from the West for the system not to be perceived as an anti-Iran or anti-Russia move while also trying to reduce the cost of a national anti-missile shield by agreeing to host a part of it at the NATO’s Lisbon summit next month.

    Gönül underlined that Ankara in principle supports the idea of the anti-missile system but said it should counter the full range of ballistic missile threats. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu said recently that Turkey does not perceive any threat from any neighboring countries and does not think its neighbors present a threat to NATO, either. The transatlantic alliance, on the other hand, says the system is intended to defend all its members against possible missile attacks by “rogue states.” NATO operates by consensus and needs approval of its 28 members for the proposed system to be put into practice. Earlier, Gönül also underlined that his government was seeking an agreement on technical issues, including how the NATO-wide shield system would affect Turkey’s national missile system and if it would cover the entire country as well.

    Gönül and Gates were the luncheon speakers on Monday.

    On the sidelines of a panel discussion the same day, US Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Alexander Vershbow however — without naming the missile defense issue outright — called on Ankara to “demonstrate publicly” that bilateral and NATO alliance relations were moving forward. He made references to Turkey’s refusal of a new round of UN sanctions against Iran and also its tense relations with Israel but assessed the issues in the context of the run-up to the Lisbon summit.

    “Unfortunately, Turkey’s statements and actions last spring regarding Israel and Iran have contributed to a political environment in which it may be more difficult to move forward, at least in the short term, on some important projects that the administration supports. … With a historic NATO summit just a month away, we should seize the opportunity to publicly demonstrate our commitment to one another,” Vershbow said. A US defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity with Reuters, later clarified that the projects Vershbow had referred to were the sale of pilotless drone aircraft to Turkey.

    Also delivering speeches at the event on Monday, two leading diplomats from both sides gave rather positive messages as to the strength of the alliance between their countries though they sometimes differ on certain issues. While Philip Gordon, the US assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasian affairs, said Turkey and the US had a very close and active dialogue in foreign policy and also had common interests within NATO, Turkish Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Feridun Sinirlioğlu maintained that “the two countries can have different approaches on some issues but we should always remember that we have a common goal.” The same views were reiterated by Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan as well.

    “Disagreements are embedded in the nature of all healthy relations. If there aren’t any, then it means that someone is being intimidated in that relationship. Therefore, we try to develop a healthy relationship with the US while always keeping in mind our common goals and values,” he said.

    Turkish Foreign Trade Minister Zafer Çağlayan also took the floor at the event on Monday and touched upon Turkey’s adherence to UN sanctions against Iran, though it voted against them at the UN Security Council meeting in June. However, stressing that the sanctions should not overstep defined boundaries and hamper Turkey’s trade with Iran in the areas that are not subject to them, Çağlayan said Turkey’s share in Iran’s imports is very minimal. “Now I am asking: Iran had an import volume of $66 billion last year. Of this, Turkey’s share was only $2 billion. So, who made up the remaining $64 billion in exports to Iran? This needs to be discussed,” he said. In his speech, Çağlayan also touched upon “non-developing” economic relations with the US. “While the world economy is advancing, as are Turkey’s exports and foreign trade, we haven’t see even a tiny improvement in trade with the US,” he noted.

    20 October 2010, Wednesday
    TODAY’S ZAMAN WITH WIRES İSTANBUL

  • Turkey faces tough call on NATO missile shield

    Turkey faces tough call on NATO missile shield

    Ankara: Turkey’s Islamist-rooted government faces making a difficult decision that pits maintaining good relations with its neighbours against joining a NATO missile shield directed against Iran.

    Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has sought in recent years to boost Turkey’s ties in the region — raising suspicions he is moving the country out of the West’s orbit — and will now have to make a decision that will be viewed as a test of its commitment to its NATO partners.

    The US plan to build a network of ballistic missile interceptors in Europe has been taken up by NATO, partly in order to convince reluctant members of the alliance to join the project.

    The Turkish government will have to stop fence-sitting soon as NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen wants a final decision on the missile shield to be made at a summit of the alliance’s leaders on November 19 and 20 in Lisbon.

    The United States says the shield is meant to protect against an eventual missile strike from Iran, but has been vociferously opposed by Moscow, which fears it could undermine its nuclear deterrent.

    This poses a problem for Ankara, which fears joining the missile shield will damage relations with Moscow and Tehran, which have improved considerably in recent years, according to analysts.

    “It is a dilemma for Turkey. On one hand you have a policy of maintaining friendship with our neighbours, and on the other you are going to be deploying arms which target them,” said Sinan Ogan, director of the Turksam think tank in Ankara.

    When the defence and foreign ministers of Turkey and the United States met Thursday in Brussels on the sidelines of a NATO summit, the missile shield was at the centre of the talks, Turkish media reported, with Turkish officials still “reserved” about joining the project.

    Upon his return to Ankara, Turkish Defence Minister Vecdi Gonul rejected that term, saying Turkey welcomed the discussions within the alliance on the shield that could be operational by 2015.

    US Defence Secretary Robert Gates was also quoted by Turkish media as saying that Washington was not putting pressure on Ankara to join the project, but was continuing to hold discussions.

    Erdogan also said Friday there had been no pressure on his country.

    “No demands have been made of us on this matter, so there is no question of us being given a fait accompli” in Lisbon, he said.

    “Turkey has not come to a decision yet, there are technical problems to surmount,” a Turkish diplomat told AFP on condition on anonymity, saying Ankara was trying to figure out a way to minimise the impact of a “yes” decision, particularly for its relations with Tehran.

    Ankara is in particular opposed to the shield being seen as targeting one country, and wants that it protects all of Turkey against a missile attack, not just areas near the Iranian border, said the diplomat.

    The question is even more difficult given the suspicions that Erdogan has been trying to move Turkey out of the West’s orbit.

    Turkey’s refusal to allow US troops to cross its territory to invade Iraq in 2003, to support UN sanctions against Iran, and the ferocity of its dispute with Israel over the raid on a humanitarian aid flotilla to Gaza have all raised concerns about where Erdogan intends to take Turkey.

    “A ‘no’ would only serve to confirm the idea that Turkey is in effect moving away from the West,” said Ogan, who believes that the Turkish government will in the end likely decide to join the missile shield project.

    The decision is also delicate as Washington remains an important ally for Ankara, particularly its support for Turkey’s battle against the PKK Kurdish rebels, said Deniz Zeyrek of the Radikal newspaper.

    Washington has been providing intelligence to Ankara about the movements of PKK rebels in northern Iraq, which they have been using as a rear base.