Turkey Considers Invading Northern Iraq
Turkish President Erdogan seems to be considering invading Northern Iraq to do something about the PKK-problem:
Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan on Friday reaffirmed Turkey’s right to send troops into Iraq to crush Kurdish rebels there and chided U.S. officials for questioning it.
“The Turkish Republic will do whatever is necessary to combat the terrorists when the time comes, but it will not announce its plans in advance,” Erdogan told a news conference after a meeting of his ruling AK Party.
“We say we are ready to take concrete steps with the Iraqi government and we also say these steps must be taken now.”
In sharp language underscoring Turkish anxiety about the chaos in Iraq, Erdogan said it was wrong for Washington — “our supposed strategic ally” — to tell Turkey, with its historic and cultural ties in the region, to stay out of Iraq.
“We have a 350 km border with Iraq. We have historic relations … the United States is 10,000 km away from Iraq, and yet is it not intervening in Iraq’s internal affairs?” he said.
Something many people don’t realize is that, by now, the PKK has killed approximately 30 000 Turks (10 times as many as were killed on 9/11). This is not ‘just’ a problem for Turkey. This is a gigantic problem.
Now, if I put myself in Turkey’s position: if I replace Turkey with the Netherlands and North Iraq with North-Western Germany, I can understand the wish, no the demand of the Turkish people to fight the PKK effectively and aggressively completely.
I would have demanded the exact same thing.
However, I also understand the attitude of the U.S.: Iraq is ruled by chaos and violence right now, but there is one major exception: Kurdistan. If Turkey would invade Kurdistan with American approval, it seems to be very likely that the PKK will turn against the American troops as well. More: it’s possible that the Kurdish people will turn against the Americans. Support for the U.S. among the Kurdish people is high. The U.S. cannot afford to lose them as an ally.
So, what to do?
My view is that the U.S. should, more actively, try to do something against the PKK in Iraq. Work with the Kurds against the PKK. The task is to convince the Kurdish leaders that the PKK is disastrous for the Kurdish people. Let Turkey protect its border…
Will that work? I’m not sure. It’s an incredibly difficult problem, but I will say this: I think that no one can blame Turkey for anything if it decided to invade Northern Iraq.
At least, I know I can’t.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
17 Responses to “Turkey Considers Invading Northern Iraq”
I know it’s not on the subject but I really must say it. Am I the only one that finds the idea of including a country that is mostly in the Middle East and borders on Iraq, of all places, in the EU is maybe not the best idea in the world?
I know nothing about the PKK conflict so I’m in no position to opine on the subject. It would be terrible to turn the one (relatively) peaceful part of Iraq into a war-zone. Then again, if the PKK is anything like Spain’s ETA, then I think crushing them is necessary and would understand the Turkish people feeling that they don’t have to ask permission to go after murderers of their own.
I agree that it seems reasonable for the US to join with Turkey and the leadership of Kurdistan to suppress the PKK. It would be a nice change to have our assistance be welcomed.
Perhaps we can get a group discount on walls for sealing borders?
Maybe by including Turkey in the EU, the EU will take more interest in promoting moderation in the near and middle east, and containing radicalism.
Paul, I appreciate the good intentions, but what you’re suggesting sounds a little different to a European. What if I told you “Maybe including by Mexico in the US, the US would take more of an interest in stemming poverty and corruption in Central America”? Doesn’t sound quite so attractive does it? Turkey is NOT a European nation and by all appearances is NOT prepared to enter the EU. The EU does establish SOME leeway for countries that aren’t quite at the level of the older members, but up until now being European to get in the European Union has been a requirement. Reducing radicalism in the Middle East is a noble cause, but it’s not our God-given responsibility.
I think we need to come to an international consensus on a strict definition of terrorism, and then we need to hold everyone equally accountable to it (including ourselves and our allies.)
Michael, increasing our efforts to combat the PKK is actually a component of the New Way Forward:
Yes and my view is that we should bring in Santa and the Esther Bunny to solve the problem. My view is closer to the diplomatic reality of the adminstration.
If Turkey should take such an action, will the EU and UN accuse it of a “disproportionate response”?
The Kurdish terror/separtist groups are a two front problem. They are causing problems with both Turkey and Iran. Both Turkey and Iran have shelled and chased the Kurdish groups into Northern Iraq. MvdG – If Turkey is correct in their response, what about Iran? The Kurdish area is SOMEWHAT peacefull, however, the Kurds are implememnting a de-Arabization policy to consolidate their power in the North. Also, what will Shia and Sunni do when Kurdish forces kill Arabs in the Bahgdada operation? Nobody is addressing the fact that the Kurds will be a majority of Iraqis forces in the new operation.
Laura Your Arab/Islamic hatered rears it’s ugly head. What Would Jesus Do or say, your responses are filled with hate.
Laura, what drugs are you on? BECAUSE I WANT SOME OF THEM!!! That’s some strong stuff you’re on.
Another parallel we don’t want to even consider. Iran has legitimate national interests in Iraq. They want to wipe out armed Sunni warriors in the country with which they share an even bigger border than Turkey. Their support of the Shia elements within Iraq is not only understandable, it is precisely what the Saudis say they will do, protect Sunni interests there, and in fact, is what we did with our support of “resistance” elements in Iraq and Afghanistan, and now in Iran. CStanley, good point, though you’ll disagree with mine. How do we define Iranian support as terrorism but our own as “freedom fighting?” And which is Turkey’s?
We act as if our providing weapons for the Afghan rebels was justified but the whole world should condemn Iran for financial support of those aligned with their interests in Iraq. And in our case, we were truly supporting an insurgency (in Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention El Salvador and Nicaragua), while Iran’s support is for the majority party in Iraq. Even more weirdly ironic, we want to kill the same Sunni elements that Iran does. How long have we been railing against the “Baathists” and “Saddam loyalists”?
What a tangled web…
This is another example of where our President is trapped by his own “anti-terror” rhetoric. That rhetoric led to our support of Russian oppression in Chechnya and worse oppression in the occupied territories by Israel. Now Turkey wants in on the game.
The US has a long history of believing it is okay for us to interfere in other countries but not for anyone else. We seem to have this belief that we are always right and most other countries are always wrong. It was okay for us to overthrow Iran’s elected Prime minister and install the Shah but…The hypocrisy of the US is making me ill.
A few factoids: The “30,000″ figure is Turkey’s, and has not been verified, but could be accurate. The PKK is a violent Marxist revolutionary group with ties to the PLO and ETA, and support for it among the Kurds of Iraq falls into single digits. PKK derives most of its revenue via state “donations” from Syria and Iran, from private sources in Turkey, and from their heavy involvement in the Asia/Europe drug trade. Most (80%?) of the heroin in France comes from the PKK. Mitterand’s wife is purportedly buddy-buddy with some of the PKK leadership.
You don’t have to wait for the PKK to “turn against” the US. They’ve never been even remotely on our side, and most of the Kurdish leadership in Iraq would be quite pleased if they were stomped on. They’d likely be willing to help–the PKK is NOT a buddy to the KDP and PUK, which parties control most of Iraqi Kurdistan. MOST of the victims of PKK violence have been Turkish Kurds. MOST of the political support is splinter political factions in Turkey who oppose the current government.
The four major state sponsors of the PKK are/were Iran, Syria, Russia, and Greece. State support for them has declined radically since 2004. The PKK has taken to unilaterally declaring “ceasefires” to explain their decline in attacks, but it’s more likely that the decline in both foreign and domestic (Iraqi and Iranian) support is more responsible–support in northern Iraq has declined considerably since the invasion, as the economy in the Kurdish north has taken off. They’re hiding up in the hills, just as the Taliban does on the Afghan/Paki border.
Erdogan is asking for the US and Iraqi military to help Turkey squash the remaining strongholds just inside the Iraqi border sooner rather than later, up in that difficult terrain, while we have the forces in place to make it easier and take some (most) of the military/financial burden off of the Turks. He’s trying to prioritize the “surge” plans in his direction for maximum immediate benefit. Understandable.
If you draw parallels with Turkey and Israel (they never did get their soldiers back), Laura’s statement isn’t too far off.
If you look at that picture, and remove the mustache…
Well, you’re doing a heckuva job brownie!
“Invasion” is too strong a word, but no doubt, Iraqi Kurds will want to portray even a limited operation as such under the current conditions. Turkish military had in the past ventured into Northern Iraq to fight the PKK, and even maintained semi-permanent presence there. I am not sure about such presence after the 2003 American invasion though (quite possible that it continues but without overt action, and everybody keeps quiet about it, lest a bigger war breaks out prematurely). All this happened within full knowledge and cooperation of the PDK & PUK. Currently, I feel, Iraqi Kurdish leadership has grander designs as to their future (can’t blame ‘em), and are fearful of Turkey’s reaction (as has been stated and re-stated repeatedly by Turkish officials: no independent Kurdistan; somewhat irrational, but understandable to some degree). And they seem to be trying to play a PKK card of sorts to keep Turkey at bay; in a rather twisted and dangerous fashion I must add. For if the PKK was not sheltered in Northern Iraq, Turkey would not have as strong a reason/justification to be outraged and flaunt its military teeth vis-a-vis the Kurdish & American inaction so far. In other words, for them, PKK is a conduit to press a well-known button of Turkey’s. What could their calculation be? My hazardous guess is, it is to force Turkey to display an outlook detrimental to regional stability, hence in contradiction with the American interests. Sort of a wedge between these long-time strategic allies who since March 2003 have entered into a frigid relationship. So, it is to keep the US on their side should an open confrontation breaks out with Turkey (potentially upon developments in Kirkuk).
I agree with Tully for the most part (except his/her last paragraph). It is especially true that most PKK victims have been Turkish Kurds. (Total numbers may be close to 40K.) Those “non-cooperating, traitors of the cause” you know. One has to hear or read some extreme PKK propagandists; their mouths foam with unashamed racism when, for example, they talk about Kurdish girls’ falling for Turkish boys, marrying them, etc… which of course has never been a problem in Turkey (I mean, no mainstream hold-ups against inter-ethnic marriages. One couldn’t even seriously point to a heightened ethnic consciousness prior to the advent of PKK.)