|
|
|
Add to My Group
With Thanksgiving so near I figured this would be a good time to talk turkey about Turkey.
 Add this mounting mess on the Turkish/Iraq border to the "Oh what a tangled mess.." file. If you've been watching this mounting crisis you might have asked yourself something like this: "If the Kurds in Iraq are "on our side," and we are in virtual control of things in Iraq, why don't US troops lay the law down with the Kurds as in , "Put your PKK dogs back on their leashes." And if they refuse, why don't US troops just obliterate PKK camps and hideouts as we do when we find al Qaeda hideouts? After all, Washington has already declared the PKK a terrorist group." Forget about it. Here's what's really going on. US planners know that (surge successes aside,) the days for a unified Iraq are numbered. Sooner or later -- likely sooner -- that pretend nation will fracture along tribal lines just as the former Yugoslavia did. When that happens the only friends the US is likely to have left in those parts would be the newly independent Kurds of the then former Iraq. Visions of permanent military bases and CIA listening posts along the Iranian border dance in the minds of Pentagon planners.The only thing that could throw a monkey wrench into that vision is US troops attacking PKK fighters to assuage neighboring Turkey. PKK rebels enjoy deep support and admiration among rank and file Kurds and any active US military action against them would almost certainly turn rank and file Kurds against the US. Even if Iraq does not break apart Pentagon planners now understand that a long-term US presence in Iraq is unlikely to be allowed by the Iranian-backed government in Baghdad. The only place left in Iraq where US troops might still be welcomed five or ten years from now is the within the semi-autonomous Kurdish region. Which is why, when asked recently at a news conferencewhat US troops were doing about PKK rebels the general in charge of that region responded bluntly, "Nothing. Not a thing." The administration's strategy towards this festering sore can best be described as "benign neglect" -- tell the Turks what they want to hear, ask the Kurds to restrain the PKK and then do nothing that might offend either side. Because the administration's choices -- all the choices -- carry their own risks. While the Kurds may be of future use to Pentagon planners, cooperation right now from Turkey is critical US military operations through out Iraq. If we piss off Turkey by openly supporting the Kurds, the Turks could retaliate by denying the US military use of Turkey's giant Incirlik Air Base. If that happened US forces in Iraq would be up Shit Creek ...no paddle, no boat. So, how has Bush benign neglect strategy worked so far? Well Turkey has now massed over 100,000 combat troops along it's boarder with Iraq/Kurdistan. PKK rebels have continued to make trouble by killing and kidnapping Turkish soldiers. And now the Turks are beginning to strike back, albeit in a restrained manner -- so far. It's another Bush administration military crap shoot disguised as a strategy. If they pull it off, meaning: the Turks never launch a full-scale attack and the Kurdish baby-nation survives the split up of Iraq and become a US-friendly ally in the region -- the neo-cons will point to the whole thing as proof they were right all along. (Never mind that a balkanized Iraq would be just the opposite of their originally stated goal.) If, on the other hand, things go terribly wrong -- as they seem to do with alarming predictability with this administration -- the world will truly have a mess on its hands:
If such a scenario plays out it would create an entirely new pecking order in the region, one not at all to the liking of the US. Bush's unseating of Saddam has already raised Iran's influence in the region. After a Turkish, Iranian, Iraq joint war against the Kurds an entirely new set of alliances would form. The Turks, Iranians and Shiite rulers in Baghdad would have found common purpose in subjugating separatist Kurds by killing as many Kurdish nationalists as possible -- on both sides of their joint borders -- hopefully driving a stake once and for all through the heart of Kurdish nationalist ambitions. But the biggest winner would be Iran, which would point to the outcome as proof positive that Iran is key player in the region, not the US -- a fact that will be all too obvious since the US would have not lifted a finger to save the out number Kurds -- once again.
http://www.newsforreal.com Stephen Pizzo has been published everywhere from The New York Times to Mother Jones magazine. His book, Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans, was nominated for a Pulitzer.
Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008 |
|
