Tag: NATO

  • Turkey’s Membership in NATO Could be Ending Soon…

    Turkey’s Membership in NATO Could be Ending Soon…

    By Harut Sassounian

    Patrick Shanahan, Acting Defense Secretary of the United States, sent on June 6, 2019, a harsh letter to his counterpart, Hulusi Akar, Turkey’s Minister of Defense. Shanahan threatened to end Turkey’s participation in the most advanced US air force jet F-35 program and implement sanctions should Turkey persist in acquiring S-400 missiles from Russia next month. The Russian missiles are incompatible with NATO’s weapons system and risk to compromise the F-35 jets operations, thus jeopardizing U.S. national security.

    Turkish President Erdogan has repeatedly rejected U.S. complaints and insisted on acquisition of the Russian missiles for which Turkey has signed a $2.5 billion loan agreement with Russia. Several Turkish military officers are already in Russia learning how to operate the new missiles. In the meantime, the United States has informed Turkey that Turkish pilots who had been training on the F-35 jets in the United States for several months have to depart from the country by July 31, 2019.

    Acting Secretary of Defense Shanahan’s letter sent shock waves into Turkey’s foreign policy and security establishment as Turkey doesn’t yet know “how to reply,” a senior Turkish security source told Al-Monitor. In the meantime, Turkey had paid over a billion dollars to acquire 100 F-35 jets. Pres. Erdogan announced that he will demand the payment back from the United States. Furthermore, Turkey, as a partner in the F-35 program, has been producing certain parts of the jets which will no longer be sourced from Turkey.

    Shanahan wrote to Turkey’s Defense Minister: “All actions taken on the F-35 are based on risks the S-400 presence in Turkey would have and they are separate from Russia-related Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) sanctions. There is strong bipartisan U.S. Congressional determination to see CAATSA sanctions imposed on Turkey if Turkey acquires the S-400. In addition to threatening the security of platforms like the F-35, Turkey’s procurement of the S-400 will hinder your nation’s ability to enhance or maintain cooperation with the United States and within NATO, lead to Turkish strategic and economic over-dependence on Russia, and undermine Turkey’s very capable defense industry and ambitious economic development goals. Pursuing this path will cause a loss in jobs, gross domestic product, and international trade. President Trump committed to boost bilateral trade from $20 billion currently to more than $75 billion, however that may be challenging if the United States imposes CAATSA sanctions.”

    On June 14, 2019, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu threatened that Turkey will retaliate to U.S. sanctions: “One country cannot give instructions to another on how to act. The US should abandon this behavior. Everyone is concerned about this. How far can it go? If the US takes steps against us, then we will be forced to take reciprocal steps,” he stated in an interview with NTV channel.

    What are the next steps? Pres. Erdogan has learned from previous experiences that Pres. Trump does not always listen to his Cabinet members or to members of Congress. Erdogan has had several phone conversations to convince Trump to form a joint study group which will buy time for Turkey. In the meantime, naturally-occurring or artificially-created world events may change the present situation. The Presidents of Turkey and the United States are scheduled to meet on the sidelines of the G-20 Summit in Tokyo at the end of June. That would be Erdogan’s last chance to persuade Trump to change his decision on the Russian missile acquisition in July.

    If unable to change Trump’s mind, Erdogan will go ahead and acquire the Russian missiles in order to avoid being humiliated by the United States. However, that would only be the beginning of a larger conflict! The United States would impose sanctions on Turkey, seriously damaging its economy. Erdogan could retaliate by banning NATO from using the Incirlik air base in Turkey. The United States would then relocate its jets to Jordan (as Germany has done) or Greece (a NATO member) or Cyprus.

    This vicious cycle of punches and counter punches could end up by either Turkey withdrawing from NATO or NATO deciding to expel Turkey.

    The removal of Turkey from NATO is a step that has been anticipated for a long time, ever since Erdogan has been acting contrary to the letter and spirit of the NATO agreement. Even though expelling Turkey from NATO is a serious decision fraught with major consequences, Erdogan is the cause by repeatedly violating Turkey’s commitments to NATO and ignoring all its warnings.

    The obvious winner in this situation will be Russia which will succeed in weakening NATO by excluding Turkey — the country with the second largest military in NATO, while earning from the sale of the missiles desperately needed income for its collapsed economy.

    However, Russia’s success may be short-lived. As soon as a geo-political conflict arises between Russia and Turkey, the newly-formed love-fest will fall apart, putting an end to Turkish acrobatic moves between East and West, and getting abandoned by both!

  • is Turkey and an armed system completely independent from the NATO possible?

    is Turkey and an armed system completely independent from the NATO possible?

    Why should Turkey buy the S-400 and have an armed system independent from the USA?

    2288
    Experts:
    • Mehmet Perincek

    Turkish-American relations have never been in such a crisis. The causes of this crisis are clear:

    – US support for Kurdish separatists and its plan for a great Kurdistan.

    – The role of Washington in the attempted coup on June 15, 2016 and the use of US Gulenist against Turkey.

    – Trump’s announcement of an economic war against Turkey.

    Facing threats from the United States, to ensure their national security, Turkey began to look for alternative armed systems. Although Turkey is a member of NATO, it has become a target of Washington. Because of this, firstly the Americans stopped supplying the necessary weapons, secondly the armed systems dependent on the USA did not meet the needs of present times.

    In this regard, Turkey decided to buy the Russian anti-aircraft missile system S-400, which annoyed Washington very much, and the crisis between the two countries has grown. Even Trump’s administration saw this purchase as a betrayal and has threatened Ankara several times.

    On this issue, we reached out to Turkish political scientists and military experts to discuss the S-400 crisis with them and the actual needs of the Turkish Army for its armed system.

    “INCREDIBLE DEGREE OF MISTRUST BETWEEN US AND TURKEY”

    Commenting on Turkish-American relations for USA Really, Prof. Dr. Hasan Ünal, an expert on Turkish foreign policy, pointed out that there has been a security and political dimension all along:

    “There has been an incredible degree of mistrust between the two NATO allies. The US’s efforts to carve out a Greater Kurdistan in the Middle East of Iraq, Syria in particular, and Turkey, linking it through a corridor to the Eastern Mediterranean is certainly a very disturbing element in US-Turkish relations from Ankara’s point of view. Notorious US efforts to bolster up the PYD in Syria, for example, despite repeated warnings from Ankara, have fostered this mistrust to a considerable degree. Ankara does not presumably think that it is going to have to encounter Russia or any Russia-backed force in the foreseeable future in this part of the world.”

    “TURKEY WILL NOT CHANGE ITS MIND”

    On the other hand, everyone is wondering if these threats of sanctions repeatedly pronounced by US officials about the purchase of the S-400 air defense systems from Russia will scare off Turkey. Prof. Ünal emphasizes that Turkey’s decisions are already determined by the needs of the country, and not by threats from the Atlantic:

    “I would say that it is less likely than otherwise that these threats are going to make Turkey give up. To put it into some perspective, Turkey desperately needs air defense systems. It would like to buy and jointly produce these systems together with Russia, and Russia’s agreement to sell these sophisticated weapons and to produce them together with Turkey at a later stage is an important inducement. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, Turkey had earlier approached the US with a view to buying them from it but it had been turned down by Washington. The US not only did not want to sell its Patriot missiles, which are not as effective as the S-400s, but it also did not agree with Turkey’s offer of co-production, let alone transfer the technology to Turkey. After Turkey made a deal with Russia about the purchase of the S-400s, the US appears to be more than willing to sell the Patriots but I suppose that it is too late.”

    WHAT CHARACTERIZES S-400s AS COMPARED OTHER AIR DEFENSE SYSTEMS

    After Prof. Unal explained the geopolitical reasons for purchasing the S-400s, we asked Beyazıt Karataş, the retired Air Force Major General (TUAF), the following question: Is the S-400 responsive to Turkey’s military needs? First he said that the most important indicator for NATO and the West is their opposition to Turkey’s territorial integrity; In this case, it is necessary to question the relations of alliance with these simple facts and take measures accordingly. Then, he told us about the characterization of S-400s as compared to other air defense systems:

    “The S-400 Long Range High Altitude Air Defense System has properties two to five times better when compared to other long-range high-altitude air defense systems in terms of their ability, as shown in the table.”

    Why should Turkey buy the S-400 and have an armed system independent from the USA?

    ARE THE S-400s DANGEROUS FOR NATO?

    Having found such an expert, it was imperative to find out whether the S-400 was a danger for NATO, as Washington said it is:

    “The S-400 is an air defense system and not an attack weapon. In particular, Turkey, having felt the lack of a long-range system since the 1990s will fill an important gap in its high-altitude air defense system. Very clearly ‘our country, our motherland’ will constitute a threat and it will be used against enemy attacks. This means that it is a system to be used against threats from an enemy country, as it is raised most, not directly against NATO, but from the air, whether it is coming from a NATO member or any country.”

    “S-400s ARE ENOUGH FOR TURKEY’S DEFENSE”

    Then the conversation with Major General Beyazıt Karataş came to the most important point: Are the S-400s enough for Turkey’s defense?:

    “There will never be an air defense system alone. Because every air defense system itself needs air defense protection. In contrast, in the S-400 contract with Turkey, Russia will provide a significant deterrence for the protection of our airspace.

    The S-400s will enter our inventory in the 2019-2020 year, according to the agreements to be made to produce our future long-range high-altitude national air defense system. Turkey will make an important contribution to the experience and Turkey-Russian political relations, the military, the defense industry, and the economic dimension will contribute to this development.

    As a result, the US and NATO are still hoping that the S-400 agreement will be canceled, as happened with China. The US is putting all sorts of pressure and blocking against Turkey and threatening not to provide F-35 aircrafts if Turkey buys the S-400. It is seen that the US will continue these threats and blackmail until the end. The implementation of the agreement signed on the supply of Russia’s S-400, for safety, also holds great importance in terms of cooperation with neighbouring countries and prestige in the international arena.”

    “THE F-35 SYSTEM WILL DAMAGE TURKEY IN TWO WAYS”

    On Turkey’s agenda there is not only the purchase of the S-400s, but American F-35s are also being discussed. Major General Karataş considers the F-35s very dangerous for Turkish defense. According to Karataş, in case of a possible war with the US, Turkey could lose control of these fighters. He says that Turkey has other reliable alternatives:

    “As it’s known, in January 2019, US President Donald Trump signed the 2019 year budget, and according to the relevant clauses contained in it, if Turkey buys S-400s from Russia, they will prevent the delivery of F-35 aircraft, sa they have repeated in every platform and continues to repeat.

    Meanwhile, the Trump administration will try to compensate for possible radical steps regarding Turkey as Congress has done so far. Indeed, in the case of the S-400 coming to Turkey, Congress would not execute the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA)–the US State Department would decide. Of course, the State Department will have to move with instructions from Trump. However, Trump may not be able to bypass the Congress in these processes.

    Technical characteristics of the F-35 aircraft include invisibility, a combination of antennas, sensors and cryptographic links to enable NATO to operate jointly, to transfer information to land maritime and other elements. These features can create the perception of “perfect planes.” But from the national logistics point of view, as particularly important considering the problems experienced between Turkey and the US, the F-35 will be out of Turkey’s control. The F-35 system will damage Turkey in two ways.

    The first is the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) and the second Performance Based Logistics (PBL). You are now procuring services from a US company and transferring logistics planning to the US nationally. For example, you want your 25 planes to be active. Under the agreement with Lockheed Martin, the parent company of the F-35s, the company manages this system to provide the activities of these aircraft to keep 25 active. So you can’t manage the activity of your own aircraft. You cannot manage your own logistics system according to the old national system. Yes, this method is economically good, but Turkey-US relations are not as they used to be.

    As a result, the US does not give the F-35s to do Turkey a great favor. Because of Turkey’s decision on F-35s, the Air Force will make Turkey 100 percent dependent on the US. This will prevent the development of our national aircraft. While the Turkish Air Force has already been tied to the US by 90-95 percent, it should be lowered. The F-35’s polished, exaggerated charm to be in the US’s orbit will make you 100 percent dependent on the US.

    If Turkey does not buy the F-35 aircraft, it won’t be the end of the world. Turkish-Russian military relations are not limited to the intake of air defense missiles, they are also increasing cooperation in space with the production of joint combat aircraft (TF-X), which should be among the priority targets. We can also say that the chance to develop new collaborations outside the US and NATO is now much more important and this is the exactly what the US fears.”

    “A NEW ERA IN RUSSIAN-TURKISH MILITARY RELATIONS”

    All our interlocutors emphasized the importance and necessity of an armed system independent from the United States. According to the Turkish political scientist Prof. Ünal, since it’s admission, Turkey has learned to develop some sort of an independent security policy for itself. He recalled that initially in the 1950s and early 1960s, it was perhaps like a US/NATO garrison in the Middle East and the Balkans and after the arrival of the infamous Johnson Letter in Ankara, in the summer of 1964, Turkey certainly moulded an independent foreign policy, though it remained in NATO:

    “It was after this 1964 policy re-evaluation that Turkey began to cultivate the best possible relations with the Soviet Union, a period that continued right up to the 1980s and even after. During these years, Turkey and the Soviet Union were on the best possible terms on trade and economy and, short of cooperating in security matters, they cultivated very good relations indeed.

    Since the end of the Cold War, things took a sharp turn for the better. Despite the Syrian crisis and the shooting down of a Russian fighter jet by Turkey, relations between Ankara and Moscow seem to be steady, and the purchase of the S-400s and possibility of co-production of several systems including S-400s seem to be heralding a new era in Russian-Turkish relations in which cooperation on security and military matters would well be on the agenda too.”

    TURKEY CHOOSES ITS FRONT

    Based on this, we can say that serious conflict and possible clashes with the United States force Turkey to have an armed system independent from NATO. In this sense, Russia and China are potential partners for Turkey.

    Turkey’s choice of the S-400 is not only an economic or technical choice. Although the S-400 has better properties compared to other systems, Turkey’s purchase of the S-400 primarily comes from geopolitical and strategic reasons. Turkey is choosing its front, its side. It is responding to threats from the United States by relocating in Eurasia.

    And this is not a choice but a necessity for Turkey. Turkey cannot survive in the Atlantic system, and maintain its territorial integrity and overcome the economic crisis. That is, to continue to exist, Turkey needs Eurasian cooperation.

    Beyazıt Karataş is a retired Air Force Major General (TUAF). Major General KARATAŞ served as the 2nd Tactical Air Force Command Chief of Staff in 2005-2006, and the 8th Main Jet Base Commander in 2006-2007. After being promoted to the rank of Major General on August 30, 2007, he served as Deputy Commander of Air Training Command and was assigned to the post of Deputy Undersecretary for Technology and Coordination of the Turkish Minister of National Defense (TMND) from September 10, 2007 to August 13, 2010. Major General KARATAŞ was assigned as the Deputy Commander of 2nd Tactical Air Force Command in 2010-2012 and retired from the Turkish Air Force on August 30, 2012. He has more than 3000 flight hours on different types of aircraft.

    Hasan Ünal is an expert on Turkish foreign policy. He holds a Ph.D. from Manchester University, Britain, where he lived between 1986 and 1993. Upon his return to Turkey, he took up a teaching job at Bilkent University, Ankara, in the Department of International Relations. Having worked at several other universities in Ankara, he recently moved to Istanbul Maltepe University.

    Author: Mehmet Perincek
    #usa
  • How would you feel about your allies…

    How would you feel about your allies…

    NEDEN ZEYTİN DALI? NEDEN AFRİN VE SONRASI?

    TRT World’ü bu muhteşem anlatım için tebrik ederim. Türkiyenin haklılığını çok güzel özetlemiş… (Arkadaşlık listesinde yabancı olanlar paylaşıp bilgilendirsin…)

    d6f2003c 9ca4 499b 8067 4dfddb167369

  • Turkey abandons Nato drill over portrayal as the enemy

    Turkey abandons Nato drill over portrayal as the enemy

    ataturk flag
    Modern Turkey’s founder was reportedly used to illustrate the enemy in the exercise

    Turkey has pulled its troops out of a Nato exercise in Norway over an alleged insult to its political leaders.

    Reports said that an image of the “enemy” in the mock exercise was actually a photo of modern Turkey’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

    Turkish media also reported that a fake social media account in the name of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was used to send anti-Nato messages.

    Turkey withdrew all 40 of its participating troops in response.

    The country has the second largest military force in Nato, and is involved both in coalition efforts against so-called Islamic State and in Nato’s Afghanistan mission.

    Norway’s Defence Minister Frank Bakke-Jensen issued a statement of apology for the incident, which he blamed on a single individual.

    He said the messages had been sent on the private computer network used in the drill, “and in no way” reflected Norway’s views.

    Turkish broadcaster NTV said that one person involved was a Norwegian officer of Turkish descent.

    • Purged: The officers who cannot go home to Turkey
    • Turkey row: Why has Erdogan riled Nato allies?

    But Mr Bakke-Jensen said the Norwegian involved was an external contractor hired for the exercise, and he had been removed from his role. An investigation is under way, he added.

    Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg also issued an apology, calling Turkey a valued member of the military alliance.

    Despite Turkey’s military and strategic importance, given its borders with Syria, Iraq, and Iran, relations with Western nations have been under stress over the past few years.

    President Erdogan was openly embroiled in diplomatic spats with Austria, Germany, and the Netherlands earlier this year when they restricted public political rallies of expatriate Turks.

    Instead, Turkey has pursued a closer relationship with Russia, with which it has also co-operated on air strikes in Syria.

    Turkey’s candidacy for membership of the European Union has also effectively stalled, and the union was critical of President Erdogan’s crackdown on academia and the judiciary following an attempted military coup last year.

    In its wake, a number of Turkish officers posted to Nato requested asylum – and have been unable to return home.

  • Trump’s Afghanistan Strategy Unveils US Stronger Ties with Tajikistan

    Trump’s Afghanistan Strategy Unveils US Stronger Ties with Tajikistan

    The United States continue expanding their presence in the Central Asia as part of the program «The Great Central Asia». As President Trump announced his new policy on Afghanistan earlier this week, the US Administration have started looking towards Tajikistan, the key region on the Central Asia which has a longer border with Afghanistan.

    Boosted earlier in 2016 by the Secretary of State John Kerry, the cooperation between the United States and the Central Asia in trade, economic development, the anti-terrorism fight is likely to be particularly focused on making stronger ties with Tajikistan as the US Embassy in Dushanbe have lobbied the military and technical aid agreement between the United States and Tajikistan. The $100 billion agreement for a period of 5 years, from 2018 to 2023, has already been approved by Tajikistan authorities, according to the head of the Tajik Border Security Forces col. Avzalov.

    As part of the agreement, the US Embassy in Tajikistan with support of «AT Communication US» will implement a new operation control system designed by «HARRIS» to the Tajik Border Security Forces. The system is designed according to the C4ICR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) standard which is used by NATO. The system will also let the United States track Tajik military actions online by integration with the communication channels of the Tajikistan’s Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

    The stronger ties the bigger funding. The United States have decreased their military and technical financing around the world from $1 billion to $800 million since the start of 2017, while Tajikistan continues to receive larger funding than any other country in the region.

    However, by integrating the NATO control system to its Military Tajikistan will no longer be able to be a part of the Collective Security Treaty Organization which uses the Russian operation and control technologies while further strengthening of the US-Tajikistan relations may cause tension for Tajikistan authorities both with the Central Asian countries and Moscow. Finally, the initiative courageously taken by the Tajik Border Security Forces may have negative results considering the authoritative and self-dependent course of the President Emomali Rahmon.

  • Turkey’s new role: From NATO lapdog to Emerging Empire

    Turkey’s new role: From NATO lapdog to Emerging Empire

    image001 7

    Turkey’s new role: From NATO lapdog to Emerging Empire

    Gearóid Ó Colmáin

    The recent Turkish coup attempt marks a turning point in NATO’s war on Syria. An emerging empire and portal to the orient, Turkey has always played a key role in NATO’s ‘Drang Nach Osten’- the drive to encircle Russia, destroy its client-states Syria and Ukraine, and serve as a bulwark against other emerging powers such as Iran. But now it seems Turkey may no longer be carrying out its designated role.

    That the United States was behind the coup attempt there is little doubt, though some prominent analysts such as Thierry Meyssan disagree that the coup was orchestrated by Gülenists. Fethullah Gülen is known to be close to the CIA and the U.S. obmutescence during the coup was typical of standard procedure during U.S. covert regime change operations. While Erdoğan is unquestionably a war criminal who is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents in Syria and Libya and heavy repression at home, nonetheless, as in the case of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, the Turkish leader seems to have fallen out of favour in the West. The media have already begun the predictable, clichéd demonisation process – publishing pictures of the Turkish incumbent’s opulent palaces etc. Turkey desperately needs a new, progressive regime, which would contribute to peace in the Middle East. But if the choice is between a monster the CIA wants out and a monster the CIA wants in, the latter is the best option as it weakens U.S. imperialism.

    Turkey’s strategic imperatives

    Stratfor director George Friedman claims Turkey is now a world power whose military is more powerful than the French or British. The U.S. strategy for Europe was to force Turkish entry into the EU – most recently through weapons of mass migration. The policy worked in Turkey’s favour. But the British decision to exit the European Union changed the balance of power. Moscow took the opportunity to extend the hand of friendship once more to Ankara. Just before the July 19th coup attempt, there were reports of a possible détente between Turkey and Syria.

    U.S./Turkish relations have soured considerably since 2013 when U.S.-based billionaire Fethullah Gülen fomented the Gezi Park protest movement against the Recep Tayyip Erdoğan regime. Though there was certainly popular discontent in the country with Erdoğan’s Islamisation policies and his support for terrorism in Syria, the Gezi Park protests were really about pushing Gülen’s attempt to destabilise the regime and take over. Fethullah Gülen is the founder of a vast empire of private prep schools throughout the world. He promotes an extremist form of Islam.

    Though originally close to Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), Gülen’s movement Hizmat (service) is less nationalist and therefore more amenable to U.S./Zionist interests. The Gülenist network operates as a fifth column in Turkey, a para-state operating at the highest levels of the military, intelligence and judicial apparatuses. I was asked by Russian state media RT to comment on the Turkish shooting down of a Russian jet in November 2015. I said then that the Turkish government was acting against the national interest. It has since transpired that the attack was carried out by Gülenist military personnel who have been prosecuted for the crime. President Erdoğan recently apologised to Russian President Vladimir Putin for the attack. In fact, Turkey had indicated on July 13th that it intended to normalise relations with Syria, thus ending the war against Assad. Contacts between Ankara and Damascus have been growing in recent months and it now looks like Russia and Turkey may have begun to mend relations. Southstream, Russia’s plan to pipe oil to Europe through Turkey, had to be abandoned last year due to U.S. pressure on Ankara. There is now a possibility of renegotiation recommencing between Moscow and Ankara. Recent Turkish/Iranian contacts also indicate that the Kurdish question is forcing Ankara to re-calibrate its foreign policy.

    Although secret talks have reportedly been taking place between Ankara and Damascus, the two countries remain at war in Syria and there is no change yet in the official position of either state.

    The geopolitical theories of Greek turkologist Dmitiry Kitsikis have had a major influence on Turkish foreign policy. Kitsikis is famous for promoting the notion of Turkey as a civilisation-state which naturally encompasses the region stretching from North Africa, through the Balkans and Eastern Europe; Kitsikis refers to this as the ‘Intermediate Region’. Turkey’s previous ‘good neighbourly’ policy seemed to be in accordance with Kitsikian geopolitics but was sabotaged by Ankara’s treacherous collaboration with U.S. chaos strategy in the Middle East since the U.S.- fomented ‘Arab Spring’ in 2011.

    U.S. policy towards Turkey has always been to support the regime as a strong regional power to wield against Russia while at the same time supporting the Kurdish YPG (people’s defense units) in Syria. U.S. support for the Kurds is part of the long-term geopolitical remodeling of the region – the creation of what former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice at the start of the ‘Arab Spring’ uprisings in 2011 referred to as the “New Middle East”. The U.S. and Israel want to carve out a Kurdistan in the region, which would become a client-state of Israel; thus providing the Zionist regime with an effective proxy army against its Arab enemies – once the Da’esh-fomented genocide has created the requisite Lebensraum.

    Erdoğan’s ambitions of reviving the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East ultimately threaten U.S. hegemony. The United States Navy rules the waves. The U.S. will not allow another major maritime power to threaten its global control. Rapid economic growth and the paying off of its IMF debt in 2013 have seen Turkey emerge more and more as a strategic regional power with increasing independence and political assertiveness. Turkish investment in Africa has increased more than ten-fold since 2000. The Turks have opened embassies all over Africa. Ankara is selling the notion of ‘virtuous power’ in Africa with infrastructural development projects and investments designed to compete with China and the United States. Turkish involvement in Somalia has turned the East African nation into a veritable client-state of the emerging Turkish Empire. In 2015 Turkey opened a military base in Somalia. Turkey will henceforth have a strategic reach in the Gulf of Aden, one of the most important oil choke-points in the world. Ankara also has plans to establish military bases in Azerbaijan, Qatar and Georgia.

    The Turkish regime has been attempting to oust the presence of the Gülenist movement in many African countries by offering to supply state funds for education programmes. A recent statement by a Turkish government spokesman alluded to Ankara’s desire to counter Western ‘neo-colonial’ interests in Africa. The statement clearly shows that Turkey intends to join the new ‘scramble for Africa’ as part of neo-ottoman imperialism.

    Turkey in Central Asia and China

    Turkey has considerable power and influence in Central Asia where many Turkic-speaking people reside. In 2009, Turkey helped found the Cooperation Council of Turkic Speaking States. Turkish investment has been increasing in Central Asia. Ankara has also been training military personnel in Central Asian states. The oil-rich Turkmenistan is one nation which has received visits in recent years from the ‘Sublime Porte’. During its spat with Moscow, Ankara sought to deepen ties with Turkmenistan in hopes of enticing that state to participate in the Trans-Caspian Pipeline – a project to pipe gas from the Caspian Sea through Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan and Turkey to Europe, thereby bypassing Russia. Turkey also has considerable influence in Turkic speaking regions of the Russian Federation such as Tartarstan. Though relations with Moscow have now improved, Ankara’s links in Central Asia remain key strategic levers in the renaissance of Turkish imperialism.

    Turkey’s links with Uighur terrorists in China’s troubled Xinjiang (East Turkestan) province has led to diplomatic rows with Beijing. Many of the Uighur terrorists operating against China have been trained and facilitated by Turkey in Syria. Although Turkey’s support for Uighur terrorists in Xinjiang complies with NATO policy towards China, it shows once again the potential reach of Turkish power.

    Turkey’s drive for world power status, together with the decline of Europe as a political entity, means that Ankara will continue to flex its muscles in the international arena. The French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault has said that Turkey is no longer a reliable partner in NATO’s fight against the Islamic State. Of course, Ankara was never a partner in the war against the Islamic State as the Turkish regime has been arming and training the Islamic State terrorists along with its NATO partners and has been caught in flagrante delicto on several occasions. But what the French Foreign Minister’s remarks mean is that Turkey may no longer be as sanguine in its support for terrorism in Syria, due to the West’s support for the Kurds; rapprochement with Moscow and Damascus, and now more than ever after the failed U.S.-backed coup attempt.

    Israel’s double game

    The situation is further complicated by Israel’s stance towards the Turkish coup attempt and its aftermath. The Turkish regime thanked Israel for its help quashing the coup. Relations between Tel Aviv and Ankara have improved, in spite of the current dispute with Washington. One should not overlook the fact that, although the Israeli Lobby exerts considerable control over U.S. foreign policy, Israel often adopts a friendlier attitude to many of America’s so-called enemies. Israel’s relationship with Belarus has always been generally good, in spite of repeated U.S. aggression. Israel’s relationship with Azerbaijan has been good, in spite of major diplomatic rows with the U.S..

    Israeli/Russian relations are far better than Moscow’s relationship with Washington. Israel has always had a more nuanced oriental policy than the U.S. The Israelis are masters at playing both sides off each other in international conflicts. During the Iran/Iraq war of the 1980s, the U.S. supported Saddam Hussein’s regime while Israel eventually provided Israel covert supplies of weapons to Iran with on U.S. approval. The Israelis had established ties with Iranian fifth columnists Mir-Hossein Moussavi and Hachemi Rafsanjani. The aforementioned Stratfor director George Friedman has said that the Iran/Iraq war would be a template for dealing with the rise of Turkey as a world power.

    A rising maritime power in trouble?

    Turkey will pay dearly for the folly of abandoning its ‘good neighbourly’ regional policy, which showed some promise until 2011. It had a glorious opportunity then to exercise ‘virtuous power’. Now the country could be facing civil war. The purge of Gülenists in the Turkish regime has already led to hundreds of arrests of top military and government personnel. If Turkey is to emerge as a regional empire, it will have to leave the Zionist axis and find a solution to the Kurdish question in conjunction with Syria and Russia. It is currently beginning to appear that previous secret plans agreed upon by Ankara and Paris to carve out a Kurdish state in Northern Syria may have to be abandoned. As the French escalate bombing of Raqqa in Syria in the wake of the Nice terrorist psyops, Turkey could be facing an acute state of emergency.

    The United States cannot tolerate the emergence of a major maritime power like Turkey which, since the Cold War, has been used as a tool against Russia. Turkey’s Incirlik Airbase holds up to 80 percent of Washington’s nuclear arsenal in Europe. A significant oriental shift in Ankara’s foreign policy would signal the end of America’s prospects of ‘full spectrum dominance’, creating the conditions for a new imperial division of the world- a geopolitical reconfiguration some might imagine as falling in with conjectures of a Moscow/Constantinople axis or, in mytho-historical terms, a ‘Third Rome’.

    It is possible that the U.S. already sees that a reconfiguration of imperialist alliances is necessary with the influential former U.S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski advocating a détente in U.S. relations with Russia and China. What is clear from recent events in Turkey is that the world imperialist system is going through seismic changes, with old military alliances breaking down and new configurations of imperial power emerging. What prospect exist for global,working-class liberation in a period of deepening capitalist crisis and war remain to be seen.

    Ahttp://www.gearoidocolmain.org/

    bout Gearóid Ó Colmáin

    image002 2

    Gearóid Ó Colmáin is an Irish journalist and political analyst based in Paris. His work focuses on globalisation, geopolitics and class struggle.