USA in need of help?

[ekrem]

R. Nicholas Burns, Under Secretary for Political Affairs
September 13, 2007

I will visit Ankara and Istanbul soon to bring a strong and clear message from our leadership -- the United States is committed to revitalize this critical partnership.
(...)
It is indeed time to rejuvenate and restore America's relationship with Turkey.
The Turkish people have just concluded important, even historic elections. These elections demonstrated the strong health of Turkey's democracy, the most impressive in the Moslem world.
(...)
We look to Turkey, with its 160-year legacy of modernizing reform, as the most successful example in the world today of a secular democracy within a Muslim society that can inspire reformers in the greater Middle East and beyond.
(...)
Turkey's importance to the United States is even more pronounced at a time when the Middle East in the 21st century has replaced Europe in the 20th century as the most critical region for America's core national security interests. Turkey is the only country in the region that can work effectively with all of the others in the Middle East. Turkey's influence is substantial and unique. In this very important sense, Turkey is an indispensable partner to the United States in the Middle East.
(...)
Our history of close relations, shared interests, and common values makes Turkey one of the most important Allies of the United States anywhere in the world. That is not to say that our relationship has been perfect: we have certainly endured our share of difficulties, misunderstandings, and miscommunications in recent years. From our perspective, 2002-2005 were particularly difficult, but we believe we have turned the corner together with the Turkish leadership. We now have a moment of opportunity to build stronger ties at all levels between our governments.
(...)
One glance at the map demonstrates why it is so important to strengthen the ties between our two countries. Turkey is influential in the Balkans, in the Black Sea, the Caucasus, and in the greater Middle East. In this vitally important arc of countries where so much of our foreign policy attention now lies, Turkey is the vital link for the United States and our European allies in addressing common economic, security, and political challenges and opportunities in these critical regions.
(...)
And, Turkey is playing a regional leadership role in the Middle East. Turkey's common borders with Iraq, Iran, and Syria provide an opportunity to advance peace and stability, fight proliferation of nuclear weapons, and defeat terrorists in a region that is now the epicenter of U.S. foreign policy. Turkey can help deepen our understanding of strategic trends in the Middle East, while reinforcing our efforts to advance political and economic freedom and fight terror to advance peace and prosperity.
(...)
In the Middle East, Turkey can play a regional leadership role that could help the U.S. achieve some of its most pressing foreign policy goals, but which will require careful coordination to prevent our two countries from operating at cross-purposes.

At the top of the list is Iraq. Our decision to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein's brutality triggered an unprecedented wave of anti-Americanism in Turkey. Our official relations have recovered from the low-point of the Turkish Parliament's vote on March 1, 2003 to reject our request to move U.S. forces into Iraq via Turkey. Since then, Ankara has been a strong supporter of our efforts to stabilize Iraq, and has asked us not to abandon our goals, particularly safeguarding Iraq's territorial integrity. Turkey represents a critical logistical lifeline for our troops in Iraq and has made important contributions to Coalition operations there.

Turkey is similarly helpful in diplomatic efforts to bolster support for Iraq among its neighbors. The United States appreciates Turkey's willingness to host the next Extended neighbors ministerial in October, an important follow-up to the work begun at Sharm el-Sheikh last May. Secretary Rice announced this week that she plans to attend this meeting in Istanbul.
(...)
Turkey and the United States also face a challenge in Iran. We have worked well together to support of the clear international consensus demanding that Iran cease its nuclear weapons development programs. Turkey has also proven to be strong partner in countering Iran's support for terrorists in the Middle East.

But the United States and Turkey still need to work out some tactical differences in handling Iran. We understand that Iran is a neighbor of Turkey and key trading partner, which sends over a million tourists to Turkey each year. Turkey's recent conclusion of a memorandum on energy cooperation with Iran, however, is troubling. Now is not the time for business as usual with Iran. We urge all of our friends and allies, including Turkey, to not reward Iran by investing in its oil and gas sector, while Iran continues to defy the United Nations Security Council by continuing its nuclear research for a weapons capability

The United States and Turkey share a common interest in working toward a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. President Bush's vision is of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security. The Palestinian Authority under President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad is the most capable Palestinian government since Oslo and is committed to being a partner for peace. As we work to develop the economy and institutions of governance that will form the foundation of a Palestinian state, Turkey understandably can see opportunities to draw on its historical experience from the Ottoman era and its modern economic might to help restore prosperity to the Palestinian people, while drawing on its more recent experience in forging a close security partnership with Israel.

Turkey is unique in its dual identity as both a Middle Eastern and European country. We thus face important challenges in U.S.-Turkish relations with regard to deepening Turkey's integration in Euroatlantic institutions.
(...)
We have weathered a difficult period over the past four years. We now stand at the edge of a potentially new era in Turkish politics that offers a chance to restore a sense of strategic partnership in U.S.-Turkish relations.

I will be traveling to Ankara soon to bring this message to the new government personally. The United States is determined to seize this opportunity to renew and strengthen our strategic partnership with Turkey. We look forward to working together with Turkish leaders who share this vision and determination to build this strong, vital and irreplaceable Turkish-American alliance for the 21st century.

http://www.state.gov/p/us/rm/2007/92066.htm

For me and the political analysts of my trust, USA is admitting to be in deep shit.
USA is planning for Post-Iraq era. I think it should be common sense, that Turkey will implement its influence and interests in areas of Iraq after USA has left. This is outcome of a clinical assesment of our power and our neighbours' power or even flyflyflyfly-weights as Kurds in Iraq.
Time is on our side. It is a question of 6-20 months until Turkey gets what it wants in Iraq. Simply by USA "redeploying" and Turkey projecting power with all avaible to there, what is currently by USA presence for different reasons not wholly possible as Turkey wants to do.
And Turkey does not half things, as it would be the case whilst USA is in Iraq.

The question where USA is in deep shit is about Iran.
USA does not want Iran-Turkey gas agreements and mutually built natural gas electricity stations and Hydro-power dams.
Also USA does not want Turkey to cooperate with Iran in Iraq after USA has left to the disadvantage of US allies like Jordan and Saudi-Arabia.

If we trust "Stratfor", which i trust as credible and comply to my assumption of things from outside USA, USA does also need someone to counterbalance Iran, and Turkey is the biggest leverage which USA has knocked its door. This assumption bases on USA not attacking Iran.

The assumption we have consistently made is that, absent the United States, Iran would become the dominant regional power and would be in a position, in the long term, to dominate the Arabian Peninsula, shifting not only the regional balance of power but also potentially the global balance as well.

That analysis assumes that Turkey will play the role it has played since World War I -- an insular, defensive power that is cautious about making alliances and then cautious within alliances. In that role, Turkey is capable of limited assertiveness, as against the Greeks in Cyprus, but is not inclined to become too deeply entangled in the chaos of the Middle Eastern equation -- and when it does become involved, it is in the context of its alliance with the United States.

That is not Turkey's traditional role. Until the fall of the Ottomans at the end of World War I, and for centuries before then, Turkey was both the dominant Muslim power and a major power in North Africa, Southeastern Europe and the Middle East. Turkey was the hub of a multinational empire that as far back as the 15th century dominated the Mediterranean and Black seas. It was the economic pivot of three continents, facilitating and controlling the trading system of much of the Eastern Hemisphere.

Turkey's contraction over the past 90 years or so is not the normal pattern in the region, and had to do with the internal crisis in Turkey since the fall of the Ottomans, the emergence of French and British power in the Middle East, followed by American power and the Cold War, which locked Turkey into place. During the Cold War, Turkey was trapped between the Americans and Soviets, and expansion of its power was unthinkable. Since then, Turkey has been slowly emerging as a key power.

One of the main drivers in this has been the significant growth of the Turkish economy. In 2006, Turkey had the 18th highest gross domestic product (GDP) in the world, and it has been growing at between 5 percent and 8 percent a year for more than five years. It ranks just behind Belgium and ahead of Sweden in GDP. It has the largest economy of any Muslim country -- including Saudi Arabia. And it has done this in spite of, or perhaps because of, not having been admitted to the European Union. While per capita GDP lags, it is total GDP that measures weight in the international system. China, for example, is 109th in per capita GDP. Its international power rests on it being fourth in total GDP.

Turkey is not China, but in becoming the largest Muslim economy, as well as the largest economy in the eastern Mediterranean, Southeastern Europe, the Middle East, the Caucasus and east to the Hindu Kush, Turkey is moving to regain its traditional position of primacy in the region. Its growth is still fragile and can be disrupted, but there is no question that it has become the leading regional economy, as well as one of the most dynamic. Additionally, Turkey's geographic position greatly enables it to become Europe's primary transit hub for energy supplies, especially at a time when Europe is trying to reduce its dependence on Russia.

This obviously has increased its regional influence. In the Balkans, for example, where Turkey historically has been a dominant power, the Turks have again emerged as a major influence over the region's two Muslim states -- and have managed to carve out for themselves a prominent position as regards other countries in the region as well. The country's economic dynamism has helped reorient some of the region away from Europe, toward Turkey. Similarly, Turkish economic influence can be felt elsewhere in the region, particularly as a supplement to its strategic relationship with Israel.

Turkey's problem is that in every direction it faces, its economic expansion is blocked by politico-military friction. So, for example, its influence in the Balkans is blocked by its long-standing friction with Greece. In the Caucasus, its friction with Armenia limits its ability to influence events. Tensions with Syria and Iraq block Syrian influence to the south. To the east, a wary Iran that is ideologically opposed to Turkey blocks Ankara's influence.

As Turkey grows, an interesting imbalance has to develop. The ability of Greece, Armenia, Syria, Iraq and Iran to remain hostile to Turkey decreases as the Turkish economy grows. Ideology and history are very real things, but so is the economic power of a dynamic economy. As important, Turkey's willingness to accept its highly constrained role indefinitely, while its economic -- and therefore political -- influence grows, is limited. Turkey's economic power, coupled with its substantial regional military power, will over time change the balance of power in each of the regions Turkey faces.

Not only does Turkey interface with an extraordinary number of regions, but its economy also is the major one in each of those regions, while Turkish military power usually is pre-eminent as well. When Turkey develops economically, it develops militarily. It then becomes the leading power -- in many regions. That is what it means to be a pivotal power.

In 2003, the United States was cautious with Turkey, though in the final analysis it was indifferent. It no longer can be indifferent. The United States is now in the process of planning the post-Iraq war era, and even if it does retain permanent bases in Iraq -- dubious for a number of reasons -- it will have to have a regional power to counterbalance Iran. Iran has always been aware of and cautious with Turkey, but never as much as now -- while Turkey is growing economically and doing the heavy lifting on the Kurds. Iran does not want to antagonize the Turks.

The United States and Iran have been talking -- just recently engaging in seven hours of formal discussions. But Iran, betting that the United States will withdraw from Iraq, is not taking the talks as seriously as it might. The United States has few levers to use against Iran. It is therefore not surprising that it has reached out to the biggest lever.

In the short run, Turkey, if it works with the United States, represents a counterweight to Iran, not only in general, but also specifically in Iraq. From the American point of view, a Turkish invasion of northern Iraq would introduce a major force native to the region that certainly would give Iran pause in its behavior in Iraq. This would mean the destruction of Kurdish hopes for independence, though the United States has on several past occasions raised and then dashed Kurdish hopes. In this sense, Novak's article makes a great deal of sense. The PKK would provide a reasonable excuse for a Turkish intervention in Iraq, both in the region and in Turkey. Anything that blocks the Kurds will be acceptable to the Turkish public, and even to Iran.

It is the longer run that is becoming interesting, however. If the United States is not going to continue counterbalancing Iran in the region, then it is in Turkey's interest to do so. It also is increasingly within Turkey's reach. But it must be understood that, given geography, the growth of Turkish power will not be confined to one direction. A powerful and self-confident Turkey has a geographical position that inevitably reflects all the regions that pivot around it.

For the past 90 years, Turkey has not played its historic role. Now, however, economic and politico-military indicators point to Turkey's slow reclamation of that role. The rumors about Turkish action against the PKK have much broader significance. They point to a changing role for Turkey -- and that will mean massive regional changes over time.

http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=293204&selected=Analyses

There is the question of what USA has to offer for Turkey, which Turkey can not achieve byitself in the region after USA has redeployed and the region is open to Turkey like a women after an cesarean cut, and by this move the action area for other neighbours dramatically narrows in regions where Turkey acts.
Iran therefore wants to ensure, that Turkey will not project power behind North-Iraq and taht Turkey restricts itself to North-Iraq.
Iran giving licence to 2 Turkish oil-firms to drill in biggest natural gas field of world, "South-Pars", going to Joint-Veture with Turkey to transport Iranian gas 50/50 to Europe and opening Iranian electricity monopol sector for Turkish Electricity Firms to make major bucks there, is an investment by Iran which will pay for them in long-term. Iranian thinking is possibly to ensure, that Iran can expand into its influence areas in South-Iraq and Lebanon and Turkey has nothing to fear from economical terms by this expansion as Turkey therefore expands directly into Iran.
Deals with Turkey are economically maybe not rational but by strategic thinking they are from view of Iran.
Against Arabs, Iran will be possible to force its power projection over them. The only obstacle is Turkey, in case of Turkey not restricting itself to North-Iraq and whirl-pooling Iranian plans. Turkey is another calibre then Saudi-Arabia and in an multiparty open conflict, what would be the case if Turkey expands into Middle and South Iraq would still be the horse to bet on.

To be honest, i think not that Turkey has an interest in exhausting its ressources to counterbalance anyone in areas which are not primarily our interest areas and an expansion by Iran is not against our primary interests.
Countries in the region will seek to arrange with Turkey rather then conflicting Turkey. And these arrangements are not negative for Turkey's interest, as by these arrangements the other side offers Turkey more then Turkey offers.

Of course Lebanon, South-Iraq we also have interests but these are more of economical nature of Soft-Power.
In the end there live Arabs and not ethnic relatives of Turkey and if we can export our goods there, then it is not really the case who rules there officially or inofficially.

And Iran extending its influence to these regions? Not that kind of problem for Turkey to exhaust its ressources to stop that Iranian expansion. Allthough stopping Iran is in Turkey's reach.
In the region no neighbour will try to piss Turkey in areas of Turkish interest, as this will trigger Turkey to act against them and they are then in deep shit like USA is currently generally speaking in reliance to Iraq and Iran.

Now my questions:
Do you share my assumptions, that USA needs a counterbalanceing force for Iran after USA "redeploys" completely or frequentially and the only option is Turkey?
Ans is in this context Nicholas Burns' statements related?
And what from American view Turkey has to gain by confronting Iran directly and indirectly in the region?
Confronting is not always military related, the fact to be there and show flag can whirlpool already plans and stop Iranian expansion, which is in Turkey's ability like stratfor correctly analyses.
From Turkish view exhausting ressources like military substance, economic growth, economic interests for anyones (USA's) interests is not that kind of status we want to be. We would in the end-effect be USA's dog like Israel, Egypt and Saudi-Arabia is and this is against Turkish self-confident interests to project power rekated to our interests in the region and not those of USA.
Our whole economic opportunities within Iran would be damaged, TPAO will only produce 20 billion m³ natural gas in Iran where Turkish total consumption is between 28-30 billion m³.
In the end-effect, Turkey would exhaust its ressources and bind its focus totally on Iran whilst Turkish focus is not only in Mid-East, and USA, Israel and Sunnite Arabs will laugh about finding dumb Turks doing the work for them.
If USA reaches to Turkey with such motive of counterbalanceing Iran, USA must know this, that Turkey knows all this i wrote.

And the last thing:
USA's new weapons subvention to Middle-East dogs will not block Iran. It will only force Iran to exhaust more ressources in its strategies.

 

[Gunny]

http://www.state.gov/p/us/rm/2007/92066.htm

For me and the political analysts of my trust, USA is admitting to be in deep shit.
USA is planning for Post-Iraq era. I think it should be common sense, that Turkey will implement its influence and interests in areas of Iraq after USA has left. This is outcome of a clinical assesment of our power and our neighbours' power or even flyflyflyfly-weights as Kurds in Iraq.
Time is on our side. It is a question of 6-20 months until Turkey gets what it wants in Iraq. Simply by USA "redeploying" and Turkey projecting power with all avaible to there, what is currently by USA presence for different reasons not wholly possible as Turkey wants to do.
And Turkey does not half things, as it would be the case whilst USA is in Iraq.

The question where USA is in deep shit is about Iran.
USA does not want Iran-Turkey gas agreements and mutually built natural gas electricity stations and Hydro-power dams.
Also USA does not want Turkey to cooperate with Iran in Iraq after USA has left to the disadvantage of US allies like Jordan and Saudi-Arabia.

If we trust "Stratfor", which i trust as credible and comply to my assumption of things from outside USA, USA does also need someone to counterbalance Iran, and Turkey is the biggest leverage which USA has knocked its door. This assumption bases on USA not attacking Iran.

http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=293204&selected=Analyses

There is the question of what USA has to offer for Turkey, which Turkey can not achieve byitself in the region after USA has redeployed and the region is open to Turkey like a women after an cesarean cut, and by this move the action area for other neighbours dramatically narrows in regions where Turkey acts.
Iran therefore wants to ensure, that Turkey will not project power behind North-Iraq and taht Turkey restricts itself to North-Iraq.
Iran giving licence to 2 Turkish oil-firms to drill in biggest natural gas field of world, "South-Pars", going to Joint-Veture with Turkey to transport Iranian gas 50/50 to Europe and opening Iranian electricity monopol sector for Turkish Electricity Firms to make major bucks there, is an investment by Iran which will pay for them in long-term. Iranian thinking is possibly to ensure, that Iran can expand into its influence areas in South-Iraq and Lebanon and Turkey has nothing to fear from economical terms by this expansion as Turkey therefore expands directly into Iran.
Deals with Turkey are economically maybe not rational but by strategic thinking they are from view of Iran.
Against Arabs, Iran will be possible to force its power projection over them. The only obstacle is Turkey, in case of Turkey not restricting itself to North-Iraq and whirl-pooling Iranian plans. Turkey is another calibre then Saudi-Arabia and in an multiparty open conflict, what would be the case if Turkey expands into Middle and South Iraq would still be the horse to bet on.

To be honest, i think not that Turkey has an interest in exhausting its ressources to counterbalance anyone in areas which are not primarily our interest areas and an expansion by Iran is not against our primary interests.
Countries in the region will seek to arrange with Turkey rather then conflicting Turkey. And these arrangements are not negative for Turkey's interest, as by these arrangements the other side offers Turkey more then Turkey offers.

Of course Lebanon, South-Iraq we also have interests but these are more of economical nature of Soft-Power.
In the end there live Arabs and not ethnic relatives of Turkey and if we can export our goods there, then it is not really the case who rules there officially or inofficially.

And Iran extending its influence to these regions? Not that kind of problem for Turkey to exhaust its ressources to stop that Iranian expansion. Allthough stopping Iran is in Turkey's reach.
In the region no neighbour will try to piss Turkey in areas of Turkish interest, as this will trigger Turkey to act against them and they are then in deep shit like USA is currently generally speaking in reliance to Iraq and Iran.

Now my questions:
Do you share my assumptions, that USA needs a counterbalanceing force for Iran after USA "redeploys" completely or frequentially and the only option is Turkey?
Ans is in this context Nicholas Burns' statements related?
And what from American view Turkey has to gain by confronting Iran directly and indirectly in the region?
Confronting is not always military related, the fact to be there and show flag can whirlpool already plans and stop Iranian expansion, which is in Turkey's ability like stratfor correctly analyses.
From Turkish view exhausting ressources like military substance, economic growth, economic interests for anyones (USA's) interests is not that kind of status we want to be. We would in the end-effect be USA's dog like Israel, Egypt and Saudi-Arabia is and this is against Turkish self-confident interests to project power rekated to our interests in the region and not those of USA.
Our whole economic opportunities within Iran would be damaged, TPAO will only produce 20 billion m³ natural gas in Iran where Turkish total consumption is between 28-30 billion m³.
In the end-effect, Turkey would exhaust its ressources and bind its focus totally on Iran whilst Turkish focus is not only in Mid-East, and USA, Israel and Sunnite Arabs will laugh about finding dumb Turks doing the work for them.
If USA reaches to Turkey with such motive of counterbalanceing Iran, USA must know this, that Turkey knows all this i wrote.

And the last thing:
USA's new weapons subvention to Middle-East dogs will not block Iran. It will only force Iran to exhaust more ressources in its strategies.

It's called bullshit politics. No one "needs" your help, and frankly, if you are any indication of Turks in general, y'all are as big a threat as Iran or Syria.

 

[DiogenesDog]

Gunny,

Your reaction here seems a bit precipitous. I have spent quite a lot of time in Turkey. I started that experience in 1965 on a mountain top stuck out in the Black Sea. I have been in and out of there many times since. By and large I have never had worry one traveling any place in the country alone because the rural Turk loves America. In the cities, I have had some headaches but nothing serious.

You know and I know that the US military is able to kick any amount of ass that needs being kicked. We are able to reduce every thing standing to rubble and then bounce the rubble as often as we see fit. It will then be the job of the infantry to check out the thermobaric reduced blobs for a pulse. The problem is that there is no armor to speak of on the back side of an Abrams. And worse yet, a Hummer is the result of a low bid, and Strykers will crap out on you in a shallow ditch. That has pretty much been our problem in this current mess. That is why I am a supporter of lots of boots on the ground and an endless supply of cigarettes and Hershey Bars.

To continue, Turkey is one of the few nations in the region that has a competent NCO corp and thinking corporals. They have been to Ft Gordon. Now, you are free to express your disdain from your perceptions, but remember, in Korea, the Chinese never succeeded in a frontal assault on a Turkish position, nor did they survive to a man an overnight defensive position. The only ax I have to grind with the Turks is their intransigence regarding the Kurds and the Armenians. Turks are a language group. They are not an ethnic entity. They don't like to hear that but I have done the anthropology and the linguistics. The Turks have no problem dealing with the Israelis. Most of those countries do a lot of trade with Israel but they don't speak of it. The Turks are quite open.

Now, I am going to guess that you have a knot in your web gear regarding the Turk refusal to allow the infantry to pass thru in the outset of the current unpleasantness. Well, when you take the Turk for granted and spring a request for a troop movement on them they are going to be as pissed as you are now. The US Air Force has to request permission just to pull chocks. It is a delicate little dance we play with them.

We need another Eisenhower and a President that will let him be Ike-like. We have a good supply of Pattons but Ikes are in short supply. I believe that there is one sitting in a staff college with silver birds on his shoulders, he will rise.

I do find that the original poster offered a very detailed excellent analysis of the current situation. I now have to go back and see if I am able to find any kinks in his circuitry.

I am as big a fan of lock and loaders like yourself as I am of serious thinkers. For the near future, we are going to have to carry some water to the surrounding national entities and seek their help or call a draft and go all in with what we can pull out of the Bible colleges.

Did you ever pull embassy duty?

I AM

 

[Denton]

I'm curious about how long Turkey is going to continue to be a secular democracy and not a straight-up Islamic state, complete with Sharia law. Considering the Turkish people are in no way fans of the U.S. I can't see them much liking the concept of doing ANYTHING that might be considered favorable to America.

As far as I can tell by looking at the last few decades, we don't do too awefully well when it comes to trying to play politics with the countries over there. The best we can do is put off troubles for a later date. Counting on a "secular democracy" that is teetering toward Islamist might not be a very good idea.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I spent 4 years as a Marine on Fort Gordon. Being a Marine in a small detachment on an Army base is just great duty. Plus as an Instructor I worked for civilians, there was of course an Army Staff NCO as senior instructor of my section, but he wasn't my boss.

We had the fun of having Turks and Greeks show up at the same time for the same class. They were split in to two classes , one during the day and one in the evening. Personally I didn't see the problem, they all lived in the same barracks and never got into any fights or had any problems. We shared the barracks with Allied Students. They had half and we had half, a wooden wall was put up on all but one floor as I recall. Being married I lived in housing not the barracks though.

 

[DiogenesDog]

I'm curious about how long Turkey is going to continue to be a secular democracy and not a straight-up Islamic state, complete with Sharia law. Considering the Turkish people are in no way fans of the U.S. I can't see them much liking the concept of doing ANYTHING that might be considered favorable to America.

As far as I can tell by looking at the last few decades, we don't do too awefully well when it comes to trying to play politics with the countries over there. The best we can do is put off troubles for a later date. Counting on a "secular democracy" that is teetering toward Islamist might not be a very good idea.

to bring yourself up to speed with regard to our relations with Turkey. I believe that you are deficient in your appraisal of US history with them.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Until and unless the Turkish military is overrun by Islamists Turkey will remain a secular Government. The military has no problem throwing out any Government they think gets to far into religious dogma. They made a thinly veiled threat to the new leader as he was voted in just a short while ago.

 

[DiogenesDog]

I spent 4 years as a Marine on Fort Gordon. Being a Marine in a small detachment on an Army base is just great duty. Plus .

it can be a bit more dramatic. Out on Cypress it can get right smoldering. I am in a weekly interfaith meeting with Greeks and Turks who are Eastern Orthodox. They have one less obstacle. We also have some Armenians and some Kurds who are Syriac Christians but there is still no conflict there.

I was at Gordon in the summer of 64 for AIT. I had been to basic at Jackson. I was waiting for my security clearance so I went to AIT, then escape and evasion-beta and then to Homestead for Jr. snake-eater school and night land navigation. I would have gone to jump school but my crypto came through and I was off to Ft Devens. A year later I was in Turkey.

 

[Denton]

Thanks for the advice, Diogenes; you appear to think of yourself as a really smart mutt.
It wouldn't be the first time we have been dreadfully wrong in our assessment and our preparations. I don't suppose I have to mention Iran 1979 or the surprise our intelligence community received when the Wall came down and all those smoke-heap cars of East Germany came chugging over for a visit!
I'm obviously not as smart as the average dog around here, but I do remember those veiled threats issued by the military, and I also recall our government issuing a statement that the Turkish military should stay out of politics.

While I am not one who served there in the 60's, I know that our relations with them are of the strained nature the last few years. Anti-Americanism is on a sharp rise and the AKP doesn't seem to be wanting to rein it in. It is also cooling its view of Israel and has even made a point of calling it a "terrorist state" a few times. Being one who is current with Turkey, I am sure you recall Erdogan meeting with the Syrian president (speaking of terrorist states) after stiffing Olmert.

I'm just a yard dog scratching at fleas, so never mind me, but you might want to keep an eye on Turkey and see how Erdogan and the AKP slowly undermine "secular democracy" in Turkey.

 

[DiogenesDog]

http://www.state.gov/p/us For me a...sent turmoil so much more disturbing. I AM

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Devens shut down as I recall. And Monmouth moved to Gordon. The schools there include Crypto repair ( well did, not sure anyone really repairs any of that anymore) I know some operators were taught there as well, though not sure if all Devens schools moved to Gordon or else where.

Fort Gordon is of course the Signals School for the Army and all the services use it, thats how I got there as a Marine instructor. I was there from 84 to 88 as an Instructor and as a student I was there in 80.

I was at Devens in 1975. But I was a stupid teenager and quit the Army. That cost me big, took over 2 years to get in the Marine Corps and I had to talk to the SgtMajor of the recruiting district. To get the waiver I had to do college and I joined the National Guard. First two years I was in the Corps they could have shit canned me for any little problem with no benefits.

The only better place to be stationed as a Marine would be aboard an Air Force base ) The zoomies are just basicly well trained civilians in uniform LOL.

 

[Gunny]

Gunny,

Your reaction here seems a bit precipitous. I have spent quite a lot of time in Turkey. I started that experience in 1965 on a mountain top stuck out in the Black Sea. I have been in and out of there many times since. By and large I have never had worry one traveling any place in the country alone because the rural Turk loves America. In the cities, I have had some headaches but nothing serious.

You know and I know that the US military is able to kick any amount of ass that needs being kicked. We are able to reduce every thing standing to rubble and then bounce the rubble as often as we see fit. It will then be the job of the infantry to check out the thermobaric reduced blobs for a pulse. The problem is that there is no armor to speak of on the back side of an Abrams. And worse yet, a Hummer is the result of a low bid, and Strykers will crap out on you in a shallow ditch. That has pretty much been our problem in this current mess. That is why I am a supporter of lots of boots on the ground and an endless supply of cigarettes and Hershey Bars.

To continue, Turkey is one of the few nations in the region that has a competent NCO corp and thinking corporals. They have been to Ft Gordon. Now, you are free to express your disdain from your perceptions, but remember, in Korea, the Chinese never succeeded in a frontal assault on a Turkish position, nor did they survive to a man an overnight defensive position. The only ax I have to grind with the Turks is their intransigence regarding the Kurds and the Armenians. Turks are a language group. They are not an ethnic entity. They don't like to hear that but I have done the anthropology and the linguistics. The Turks have no problem dealing with the Israelis. Most of those countries do a lot of trade with Israel but they don't speak of it. The Turks are quite open.

Now, I am going to guess that you have a knot in your web gear regarding the Turk refusal to allow the infantry to pass thru in the outset of the current unpleasantness. Well, when you take the Turk for granted and spring a request for a troop movement on them they are going to be as pissed as you are now. The US Air Force has to request permission just to pull chocks. It is a delicate little dance we play with them.

We need another Eisenhower and a President that will let him be Ike-like. We have a good supply of Pattons but Ikes are in short supply. I believe that there is one sitting in a staff college with silver birds on his shoulders, he will rise.

I do find that the original poster offered a very detailed excellent analysis of the current situation. I now have to go back and see if I am able to find any kinks in his circuitry.

I am as big a fan of lock and loaders like yourself as I am of serious thinkers. For the near future, we are going to have to carry some water to the surrounding national entities and seek their help or call a draft and go all in with what we can pull out of the Bible colleges.

Did you ever pull embassy duty?

I AM

Lived in Karamursel for two years, and Iraklion, Crete for a year. That was BEFORE I joined the Marines.

If there is a knot in my gear, it's with the poster, not the country. He's a walking, talking poster child for Turkish ultra-nationalism and unlike you, I do not find his analyses excellent ... I find it to be ultra-nationalist propaganda.

I also disagree with "carrying water." I'm all for pulling out of everywhere and letting an ungrateful world that does nothing but criticize handle its own problems.

I was never on embassy duty. I did however spend a quarter of 20 years deployed to the Far-and-Middle East.

 

[ekrem]

Lived in Karamursel for two years, and Iraklion, Crete for a year. That was BEFORE I joined the Marines.

If there is a knot in my gear, it's with the poster, not the country. He's a walking, talking poster child for Turkish ultra-nationalism and unlike you, I do not find his analyses excellent ... I find it to be ultra-nationalist propaganda.

I also disagree with "carrying water." I'm all for pulling out of everywhere and letting an ungrateful world that does nothing but criticize handle its own problems.

I was never on embassy duty. I did however spend a quarter of 20 years deployed to the Far-and-Middle East.

GunnyL, you are one of the persons, i normally do not like to talk with. You are so biased about Turkey, that you disqualify youself.

65 % of the industrial materials of Middle East and North Africa are exported by Turkey.

Source: Foreign economic relations Board
http://www.deik.org.tr/deik_baskaninin_mesaji_eng.asp

From Oxford Analytica:

(...)
Turkey has the most sophisticated export structure in the region -- more than 90% of its exports are manufactures, and 37% are medium- and high-tech manufactures.
(...)
Turkey and Saudi Arabia alone accounted for 78.4% and 53% respectively of the region's combined manufactured trade and manufacturing value added in 2005. They also represented 81.5% of region's sophisticated manufactures (medium and high-tech manufactures), up from 66.4% in 2000.
(...)

http://www2.ifc.org/newsflash/docs/MENA_OA407.doc

I did this before on this board to summarize Turkish superiority in military over our neigbours, scientific output, industry capacities etc.. So there is no need to do it again.
People like GunnyL may find this ultra-nationalistic, but i have the feeling that normal Americans have no clue about Turkey and what role Turkey wants to play, and as it has the capacities will play in the region.
I find the above "stratfor" article in compliance with my views, and this article puts it in words i could never do in English language.

Sundays on CNN at late edition it is always talked about Middle East and Iraq, where Turkey is never mentioned.
As if we are no party to all this and are in a status of tiny Bahrein. But in reality we are the biggest claimant to project our power over our neighbours.
Our navy is the best and biggest Navy in the region. In a war we can just send our armada to the coast of these countires and sink their oil-exports and industry-goods imports. To face Turkish Navy, Navys of countries have to join to establish a combined force to have a chance sinking Turkish navy in front of their coasts.
We can easily switch industry capacities to war capacities and produce more Frigates.

I did this also before of compaering Turkish firepower against our neighbours. So no need to do again:
http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=47941

What Turkey has, is the strategic advantage over our neighbours. Our neighbours can just send Missiles to Turkey. But Turkey will send airforce and paralell Navy for sea-blockade of economy and Missiles are nothing against this if not equipped with WMD's.

What has this now to do with Post-USA Iraq?
Simply Turkey will act for its interests. And if a neighbour thinks these Turkish interests collide with theirs, Turkey has nothing to fear and is prepared.
This confidence will act only for Turkish interests.
So there might be areas where Turkish interest in Post-USA Iraq do not comply with USA interests. But has it to?
So the question is, why Turkey should act in a way for interests that are maybe not our interests.

Iran will never get upperhand over Turkey in terms of industry, economy and military.
As long as Iran does not equip with Nuclear weapons, Turkey is the biggest military power in the region.
Israel might be more technologically advanced, but Israel can never invade Turkey as the quantities are not there for invadeing Turkey.
Turkey, excluding all foreign factors, could at a very high cost of military hardware and personel deaths invade Israel. But this is anyway out of question as a possibility of Israeli-Turkish war is zero in present and in future.
So it is not an concurrence Iran wants capabilities to produce Nuclear weapons.
It is strategic thinking not solely related to hindering USA invasion, but also to factors in region itself for the future. Iran can maybe invade Saudi-Arabia, but not Israel or Turkey. Also Israel does not have capabilities to make the life of Iran constant hard, as they are not neighbours.
But Turkish Army is neighbour, and if a need arises we can confront Iran constant.

Of course a nuclear Iran will change balance to disadvantage of Turkey.
But a nuclear Iran will trigger Turkey also going nuclear to again make the balance to our advantage.
I am fully convinced, that Israel or Britain would give Turkey some nuclear weapons to speed up this process of a nuclear Turkey.
A nuclear Iran will trigger a third power to become nuclear to balance the region and this permission will be granted to Turkey, not Saudi-Arabia or Egypt which could turn against Israel.

So as long as USA does not bomb Iran and makes a regime-change to install a puppet-government in Iran, Iran will further go on with its plans for the region.
The USA can not ever concentrate on Middle-East, as other powers like Russia do need attention, too.
The question in the case of USA not makeing a regime change in Iran is, how Iran's expansion against US interest to direction of Mediteranean and near Israel can be hindered, even when Iran's intention is multiplied by the fact it once has nuclear weapons. Part of this is USA strategy is surely the arming up of US allies like Egypt and Saudi-Arabia.
If this is a good thing for USA in long run and will block Iran in near future is doubtful.

For Turkey the future is rosy, and temporarily problems in Iraq will solved once USA has left.
With other neighbours we will have good relations. Be it Iran, Saudi and Israel.
Turkey is like a bride every different factions wants on its side and wants to hinder marrying to the other side, as Turkiey in a faction will ensure the opposite faction will loose.
This gives Turkey strategic advantage.
Whilst Iran, Israel and Saudi-Arabia are in de-facto war at each other Turkey will exploit Economic interest by playing each other against each other.

We will be in no faction, we will act independent and to our interest of maximizing our power. It will come itself, whilst Turkey is opening military and econimical gap to our neighbours.
Stoping this Turkish rise would be exhausting our ressources to be in a camp of de-facto nations which are in war at each other.
Turkey in camp of Arabs means less business exhange and influence over Iran.
Turkey in camp of Iran means less business exchange and influence over Arab world.

So it is not in our interest of being in any camp.
Turkey being the watch-dog of USA in post-USA Middle East confronting Iran on every issue USA wants would need Turkey to be a party against other parties.
Why we should limit ourselves to a role which other nations have designed for us and not be fully independent in our policy?
Just by USA saying "revise energy relations with Iran" and "Turkey a unique model in Muslim world" goes in the left ear and out of right ear.

 

[ekrem]

I forgot to add this news. But i will not talk about it. Just for attention.

The cousin of the foreign minister dies

A relative of Foreign Minister Ali Babacan, Private Erkut Babacan, died in an attack by the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) in the eastern Anatolian town of Bitlis, the Doğan news agency reported yesterday.

A group of PKK militants attacked the central Çeltikli Gendarmerie Station Command with long-range weapons, killing one soldier and injuring another. The body of 21-year-old Babacan was sent to his hometown Ankara after a ceremony in Bitlis.

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=83908

 

[DiogenesDog]

Thanks for the advice, Diogenes; you appear to think of yourself as a really smart mutt.

yourself. You seem to be right up to date with the Turk.

"Smart Mutt"? Thanks. I take that as a compliment in the spirit of the "Old Dog of Sinop." I am just an aggressive fact finder and way too many things interest me. I had the cable pulled from my house at the beginning of Iraq Redux. I keep up on line, with a couple of papers a day and NPR. I am in my second semi-retirement and I work mainly from home.

I do believe that the Turk plays the political power game with the best of the second string. I have said that Turkey may grow into its role. The current leadership seems a bit timid to me. There is an element that dearly wants to be the eastern most member of the EU and that element is continuing to struggle. With the fall of the CCCP, Turkey became a favorite vacationing spot for the Rus. That seems to be a sore spot with Washington. Syria is going to continue to be problematic for some time. They will be effectively held in check as long as Jordan is Hashemite and Turkey remains relatively stable.

Thanks for your response. Don't be put off by my edgy style! I find that a silver back rant now and again keeps the whack jobs at bay.

I AM

 

[ekrem]

I do believe that the Turk plays the political power game with the best of the second string. I have said that Turkey may grow into its role.

But this role won't be designed by anyone except Turkey itself. Assymetric war is another thing, but looking at states, Turkey has no natural enemy in this region. We can compete with any state in the region.
States of the region have to unite to put Turkey a leg, so that Turkey falls over it.

Historically speaking Shiites have nothing to do with Iran.
Shiite branch of Islam was first powerfull in Kairo (Egypt) with the Arab Hashemite Dynasty. Arab-Hashemite Shiites even conquered Mekka and Medina.
It was Sunnite Turks under Sultan Alparslan from Seljuk-Turks after slapping Byzantines in 1071, now cleaning Shiites from the region and contain Shiite rule over traditional Sunnite ruling area.
Most Turks have Sunnite religion from Iran. Iran was before Turks came from Central Asia Sunnite faith, and Turks adopted Sunnite Islam their way through Iran, to put it in simple words for American audience.

Shiites played no meaning in the area after that, until in today Iran area the Safavides came to power. This was a Turkmen dynasty also emigrateing into the area from Central Asia and adopted Shiite branch of Islam and expanded Shiite branch of Islam in todays Azerbaijan and Iran by force.
Modern Iran has Shiite religion from Safavides, otherwise it would still be Sunnite.
Shiite branch of Islam now again tried to expand into traditional Arab sunnite ruling area by Safavides, and this time it was Sunnite Ottomans containing and pushing Shiite religion away from traditional Sunnite ruling area.

The region not being Shiite is tributed to Turks from Seldjuks and Ottomans.
Otherwise modern day Arabs would be Shiites.
From history, ancestors of modern-day Turkey were the only ones designing the region and pushing back other religious powers.
In case of Safavides, these were ethinc relatives of Seldjuks and Ottomans.
But in that time Religion was important and not ethnic links.
Nationalism into this region came by Europeans, in the end being a co-factor of Ottoman colapse.

Military speaking, one F-16 can carry up to 7.000 KG of bombing material.
Iran's new missile "Ghadr" with 1.800 KM range has a missile payload of 500 KG.
14 Iranian Missiles equal 1 Turkish F-16.
Whilst F-16 can constantly be re-armed and non-stop operated in the air by Turkish tanker fleet, F-16 will strike Bombs clinical into aim. Iran has no cruise missile technology nor GPS-based systems directing their missiles.
So missiles of our neighbours are a joke against a modern and powerful airforce.
Something Iran does not have.

Turkey with current order of 30 new F-16 will have about 260 F-16 together with CCIP upgrade in Block 50/52 standard.
Only these aircrafts would bring bombing materials in one strike equal to 3.640 Iranian Missiles, something i doubt Iran has in this numbers. And now imagine F-16 fleet flying not one strike mission but re-arm and bomb again.
F-4E Terminator in our inventory upgraded with Israel and F-5 and future F.35 is not even in this calculation.

Russian anti-aircraft missile-systems in Iran or Syria is no big business to eliminate. Turkey co-produced with Israel new aircraft-missiles of Popeye-II with 305 KM range. Anti-aircraft missile-batteries would first be destroyed, Turkish aircrafts even not being in range of anti-aircraft-missile-battery locking from our neighbours.
For that Iranians must have S-400 from Russia, which Russia actually does not yet export and is itself deploying the first ones from arm-factories arunf Moscow.

Missiles is something for states who can not operate an airforce and do not have money to keep a large Airforce of different fighters (air-superiority, bombers etc) in tact.
If conventional missiles would be that effective, NATO would have bombed Serbia solely with Missiles and not with Airforce power. Something USA also did not in Iraq. And Iran also does not have something equal to Tomahwaks (cruise missile).
If Iran would wanted to attack an Hydro-dam in Turkey and fires maybe 10 Missiles, maybe 5 of them do hit anywhere else rather then the aim.
So Iran is not really a threat to Turkey or Israel. And for USA anyway not.

Of course this changes once conventional missiles will be equipped with WMD's.
Iran can not compete in conventional military against other powers in the area.
Nuclear bomb with missiles would be an ensurance, not to loose in an open war.
But a nuclear Iran would shake power balance of this region.
And a nuclear Iran will not be containable by Israel.

Iran is the key of finding an answer to the question if regional states will start a nuclear arms race. And Turkey here is also the only option to produce Nuclear weapons without greater help from outside.
And if we look serious to the matter Egypt or Saudi-Arabia would never be allowed to aquire nuclear weapons, as in long-run it is not clear whether these states would instrumentalize their new ensurance of nuclear weapons against Israel.
This is not the case with Turkey.
First 3 Turkish Nuclear power plants will be online between 2012-14. And these plants will be operated by private business companies and not state.
TAEK which is State nuclear agency is currently developing indigenious nuclear reactor in prototype of 100 MW and has receives in 2006 extra budget by 3 billion dollars to develop and research on alternative fuels(Thorium) for indigenious reactors.
Nuclear reactors by state firms or ministries will be online well after 2015.
So Turkey as reaction to Iran going also nuclear would take its time.
Time which Israel would surely wanted to shorten by delivering Turkey enriched Uranium, or what is more likely plutonium from burnt out fuel rods, to make bombs to be thrown by F-35 rather then delivered by missiles.
One thing is clear, a nuclear equippment of Iran army will trigger a third power in this region to become nuclear. And this will be Turkey as strongest country around and from there no danger to Israel's security arises.
Can't imagine, that Egypt or Saudi-Arabia would anytime be accepted as nuclear power.

 

[Gunny]

Whatever happened to that cheerleader avatar?

 

[ekrem]

Turkish and Israeli General staffs have something what Hollywood Films would portay as "red telephone". But we have a satellite communication system linking the 2 General staff offices which was set-up in 1997.

8 times a year Israel and Turkey exchange Pilots to be trained in each others airforce. Also Turkish airforce does train in Nevatim Airfield in Israel, and Israelian Airforce train in Turkish Konya at Training facilities where "Anatolian Eagle" yearly takes place. Last time Israelian airforce was in August 2007 in Konya.

That this training exchange is not only theoretical can be seen by the point, that a Israelian pilot died while makeing dogfight over Aegean Sea, whilst Turkish F-16 were intruding Greece and Israelian Pilot was co-pilot of Turkish f-16.
It is natural training between Turkey and Greece, whilst Turkey is the attacker and Greece the defender.
Official numbers of Turkey intruding Greece are not published, but in 1996 Turkey intruded Greece about 1.600 times with airforce, we train in real conditions and paralell take photos of location of Greek anti-aircraft missile batteries.
So this is good real-condition training.

According to an official report, the TUAF formation had illegaly violated Hellenic airspace and so was intercepted by 2 HAF Mirage 2000EG (331sqn, 114FW, Tanagra AB). The 2 TUAF F-16s evidently denied to comply and started agressive maneuvers against the HAF Mirage 2000EG. During the engagment that followed, one of the HAF Mirage 2000EG (piloted by Lt. Grivas) fired a Magic IR missile. As a result a TUAF F-16D (#91-0023) was shot down. Immediately the second TUAF F-16 paused the engagment and escaped to the east in order to return to international air space. It was later determined (and kept secret) that the downed pilot who didn't survive the crash was in fact an Israeli pilot (Capt. Nail Erdogan) dispached from IDFAF. The second pilot (Lt. Col. Osman Cıcekl&#305 ejected safely. The downed pilot was rescued 30 min. after shot down by a HAF AB-205 SAR helo (from 358th search and rescue squadron). The pilot received immediate medical care and returned a few days later to Turkey with a HAF C-130 flight.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_mishaps_year-1996.html

Like you can see from the link, it is clear that Turkish pilots do take Israeli pilots to training in real conditions by intrudeing Greece. Would the Israelian co-pilot not die we would have never known.

In Israel there are no mountains, and the area Israel and its neighbours lie has no winter weather conditions. So Turkey trains Israelian Mountain commandos in East-Turkey together with Turkish Bolu and Hakkari mountain commando brigades.

Turkish and Israelian navy also do regularly exercises in East-Mediteranean.

Turkish company Otokar currently develops 4 prototypes of Main Battle Tanks.
Turkish Army will choose then which prototype will be mass produced.
But prototypes will have 120mm gun and armour from Israelian Merkava-4 MBT.
This was technology-transferred to Turkey, when Turkey and Israel upgraded together old American M-60 MBTs in Turkish inventory to SABRA standard MBT's.

The upgrade program also encompasses the Merkava Mk.IV add-on armor technology and explosive reactive armor (ERA)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_(tank)
Very good armour for new Turkish tanks.
We will mass-produce them in 4 digit numbers.

Missiles, drones etc. also we co- produce/develop with Israel. But that are smaller things like the Popeye-2 air-to-surface missiles. Currently we negotiate with Israel to co-produce the 500 KM Delilah-2 Cruise Missiles.
Will fit-in very well with Kasirga and Yildirim missiles of Turkish army.

 

[Gunny]

So what you're saying is the world's going to have to kick your ass again and put you back in your place again? Some fools never learn.

 

[Gunny]

GunnyL, you are one of the persons, i normally do not like to talk with. You are so biased about Turkey, that you disqualify youself.

Wow. Missed THIS little gem. NOBODY is more biased on Turkey than YOU. You more than disqualify yourself. Gonna shut up? I seriously doubt it.