Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
December 21, 2005
Tidbits from Turkey on Iran
by Dan Darling at December 21, 2005 06:02 PM
CIA Director Porter Goss and FBI Director Mueller's visits to Turkey received extremely little attention in the Western press, but from the stuff that's leaked out in the Turkish press, there is reason to think that it might do well for all of us to pay attention to what's going on there.
According to this summary of Hurriyet's reporting, a major topic of the discussions centered around the PKK, which is currently subsisting in their Brave New World-style communes in northern Iraq and has launched a number of attacks into Turkey since the 2003 US invasion. Most Turks (correctly) regard the PKK the same way that most Americans do al-Qaeda, so this is understandably a big issue in Turkey and one that we have been trying to resolve together with them and the Iraqis for some time now, particularly because we do not want the Turks sending the several thousand troops and support personnel into Iraq that it would take to finally wipe out the PKK.
For those who are curious about this passage:
Turkey will warn that such a development would increase the influence of al Qaeda terror network.
What the Turks are referring to here is the various Kurdish Islamist groups that once banded together under the aegis of the Islamic Movement of Kurdistan during the early 1990s but have since splintered into a number of different factions, one of which was Ansar al-Islam. I should stress that we are talking 5,000 Islamist fighters at the absolute maximum, as opposed to the 100,000+ peshmerga now fielded by the various Kurdish factions. With the exception of maybe Komala Islamiyyah (which jointly garrisoned Sergat together with Ansar al-Islam prior to the war), none of these other Kurdish Islamist factions have overt ties to al-Qaeda, but they are still a security concern for the Turkish government.
Then from Zaman we get a look at some of the Turkish pressure on the US to stop what they see as European tolerance for PKK activity in Europe, some of which more or less resembles the way that Israel criticizes the Europeans for drawing a distinction between the military and political wings of Hamas and Hezbollah. It also seems that Mueller raised the issue of Louai Sakra, which suggests that the CIA agrees with the Turkish assessment of him as a senior al-Qaeda leader.
The most interesting details of the meeting seem to have appeared in Cumhurriyet, which states the following:
During his recent visit to Ankara, CIA Director Porter Goss reportedly brought three dossiers on Iran to Ankara. Goss is said to have asked for Turkeys support for Washingtons policy against Irans nuclear activities, charging that Tehran had supported terrorism and taken part in activities against Turkey. Goss also asked Ankara to be ready for a possible US air operation against Iran and Syria. Goss, who came to Ankara just after FBI Director Robert Muellers visit, brought up Irans alleged attempts to develop nuclear weapons. It was said that Goss first told Ankara that Iran has nuclear weapons and this situation was creating a huge threat for both Turkey and other states in the region. Diplomatic sources say that Washington wants Turkey to coordinate with its Iran policies. The second dossier is about Irans stance on terrorism. The CIA argued that Iran was supporting terrorism, the PKK and al-Qaeda. The third had to do with Irans alleged stance against Ankara. Goss said that Tehran sees Turkey as an enemy and would try to export its regime.
The implication here is that the US believes that it'll be using Incirlik in any aerial operations against Iran and wants to secure Turkish cooperation on that score - the visit of Turkish Chief of Staff General Yasar Buyukanit to DC is likely related here. I would also note that the issue of Iranian support for the PKK has long been the official position of both the US and Turkish governments, as can be seen in this excerpt from the 1999 Patterns of Global Terrorism that was completed during the Clinton administration:
Tehran still provided safehaven to elements of Turkey's separatist PKK that conducted numerous terrorist attacks in Turkey and against Turkish targets in Europe. One of the PKK's most senior at-large leaders, Osman Ocalan, brother of imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan, resided at least part-time in Iran.
With the Turkish capture of Abdullah Ocalan ("Apo"), Osman is now the de facto head of the PKK. As for Iranian support for al-Qaeda, revelations that al-Qaeda leaders based in Iran helped to finance the November 2003 Istanbul bombings (the "Syrian" referenced in the article is Louai Sakra) in direct contradiction to Iranian claims that such individuals are in detention and unable to direct or support terrorist operations.
I would note that for Turkey, Iranian support for Sunni Islamist terrorism against the Turkish state is not nearly as controversial an issue as it is in say, Europe. Since 1979, Iran has deployed every means at its disposal in an effort to undermine or otherwise destroy the secular foundations of the Turkish state. Indeed, the unyielding Iranian hostility towards Turkey is one of the reasons that the country has no problems maintaining close military ties to Israel - the two nations share pretty much the same enemies. Whether it's recent events or past ones, Turkish military and intelligence officials will have no trouble believing the US on this one - it's simply been part of their daily lives for the last 25 years.
Please note that what the Turks think is a different issue altogether from whether or not airstrikes against Iranian nuclear facilities are prudent or even wise at this point. I should note that myself am skeptical of the idea that limited airstrike on Iran would deter their nuclear program. Rather, I think that most likely outcome of such an attack would be to push back the date nuclear program with the unintended consequences of shoring up domestic support for the regime, an event that would but ensure the emergence of a nuclear Iran a little further down the line.
I see that Mehran Riazaty, a former CPA analyst now blogging out of Regime Change Iran, has some thoughts of his own on Iranian support for terrorism in Turkey, which he ties back to the Qods Force unit of the Revolutionary Guards that we've mentioned before.
Kathianne said:That happens to me all the time. Gotta clean the lenses.
I go commando, my reading glasses have been worn by me exactly once but they made me dizzy 
So that was that.
That worked for me for about 2 years, had to hold the book WWWwwwaaaayyyy far away and my arms are short!Bonnie said:What lenses
Kathianne said:Stuff Out of Turkey
Nope, I'm just trying to keep myself amused.Mr. P said:LMAO I thought this was a food question, maybe.
Stuffing in the Turkey, or out?
Must be bed time.
Or I could say, "You fell into the trap I set and just sprung it!" But no, I just was playing with words. Bad me.
Well, I could say, "WITCH"! :spank3:Kathianne said:Nope, I'm just trying to keep myself amused.
Bonnie said:Interesting, but my eyes are very bleery I thought this post was captioned "Staff out of Turkey" I know I know
canavar said:What is your view of this issue:
Do you think there will be an operation against Iran?
If yes, will it be air-strikes or regime-change backed by us-soldiers marching into Tehran?
Kathianne said:Yes and sooner than later. The second part is hard to say. My guess, if they knew they could just 'take them out' they would. Problem is, seems they are scattered, so
That's what I meant by 'scattered'. I think you are right, on all counts, though not sure that US will do the air strikes.canavar said:Yes. On the first part i agree with you. No nuclear weapons to such a regime.
On the second part it is getting into military detail. With scattered you mean, there are different views on this issue in example in the Pentagon?!
The question is: whether americans will be able to destroy all facilities via air-strikes. Effects of bunker-breaking bombs is also limited. When USA isn't sure they are going to destroy all facilities from air they will march into Iran by ground. That USA uses mini-nukes or such a thing will destroy your image in the world forever. And it reduces the morality-level for other Powers to use such weapons. But i don't want to get into militarily-operating details, of which i also lack in information.
In case of Iraq, USA could also bomb all "suspicious" facilities by air. Which they didn't and prefered to march into Iraq and overthrow Saddam-regime. It is the question what is the primarily goal of USA: Destroying Nuclear facilities in Iran or regime-change. But i think bombing by air-strike will only delay the problem. The brains in Teheran which are ambitious for the Bomb will still remain.
Regime-change will cost many lives on both sides and much much $ to USA. But I think, remembering the Anti-semitic words by Ahmadinajad, such an operation against Iran whether Air-strike or Regime-change won't be that controversy in the World. When i remember German presidents words in the Knesset :"Shoa is part of our identity" some states will definitely support USA actions against this regime. Even when this support is not via active troops or jet-fighters.
Compareing Iraq to Iran. Iran is a much BIGGER problem.
We are normal civilians therefore we can only speculate which the best step is taken against IRAN. This is all complex, we even did not mentioned Russia or China who have also intersts in Iran.
I hope your government will take the right steps and everything is going OK so that the whole world doesn't explode while we are watching from TV.
By the way: Merry Christmas to all readers and all USmessageboards-USERS.
Kathianne said:That's what I meant by 'scattered'. I think you are right, on all counts, though not sure that US will do the air strikes.
canavar said:Yes. By only doing air-strikes, there remains the HIGH possibility that Iran will revenge in IRAQ, Afghanistan and other parts in the middle-east.
It is like a Hornet-Nest. Stepping on it and then all hornets are flying through the region and sting in different parts of the region. Which then will again lead to WAR.
I think when there is an operation against IRAN it is best to march with troops in. So all forces from Iran will be used within their own boarder. That USA will defeat IRAN is without doubt. So why not combining Regime-change with destruction of the nuclear facilities.
USA has when it is mobilized 2,8 Mio soldiers. 17.000 MBTs and 1000 Helicopters and 3000 Jet-fighters.
Regime-change of course means: More Adams, Jonathans, Marthas, Diegos, Georges, Susannas which will be for some years again doing their duty in an foreign country. Maybe this IRAN issue will be more controversy in USA itself than in the world. All these mentioned names before have mothers, fathers and children left in USA-soil.
It is a high price that can lead american society to an ultimate break-up into 2 sides, when i observe it from outside. But Iran is really a threat in comparance to Iraq.
Hope we will get out of this well and your current government has learned from its faults in Iraq. Namely: Dealing with the civilian society, Dissolveing Iraqi Army+security forces, sending Iraqi generals home who then joined the terrorists with their military knowledge and skills.
Of course, In some ways this had to be done as Kurdish Peshmergas and Shia security organs were not included in Baathists security organizations. You had to build up security-forces which consist of all groups.
In Iran there is a security system which works and consists of all parts of the society. Which ca be used after regime-change. But Maybe i am even wrong with my predicitions of Regime-change. I don't know.
Kathianne said:On lessons learned, have no doubt, we do have a high learning curve. Also a short historical memory, which Turkey, like Germany before it will be happy about.
canavar said:Yes, Kathianne. In Germany is now Merkel in power although she is in coalition with Schröders party. But Germany has a duty to protect Jews because their history. Also in Germany there is a strong Jewish lobby. In Germany there is even debated to ban IRAN from the soccer World championship next year in Germany. But this idea FIFA (International Football association) denied.
From Turkey's point: Iran is a threat. Also a contrahent with its IRAN-ARMENIA-RUSSIA Axis againt TURKEY-GEORGIA-AZERBAYCAN Axis on one side and TURKEY-ISRAEL axis on the second side. A nuclear Iran is from our view a horror-scenario. Iran is playing much dirty tricks against Turkey from assisting Anti-Turkish terrorists to prevention of Turkish firms buying Iranian ones. We have with Iran for about 300 years peace.
Before Russian communists brought persians to power 80 years ago, Iran was ruled by TURKIC people "Safavids" (SHIA). Allthough this: Ottoman-Turks (SUNNITES) always made war against Safavid-Turks and the other way round, too. It is nothing especial we made war because this were religious wars. But since 300 Years there is peace with them. And now Iran is ruled by Persians which are since 1979 Mullah.
From SHIA Mullah-View Sunnite Turkey is bad. Suniite Secularistic Turkey is even much more worse for them. They trained Turkish islamist terrorists to overthrow Turkish secularistic system. Also they backed PKK against Turkey.
But now, no wonder, IRAN is being pushed against the wall by USA, Iran is cooperating with TURKEY against PKK.
Whilst USA did not cooperate with Turkey against PKK. Since Iraq-war USA did nothing to please Turkey in case of PKK while Iran was enthuasticly willing to work with Turkey against PKK. IRAN even made attacks and cleaned its territory from PKK to please Turkey. Of course Iran didn't do this because they like Turkey but because of self-interest.
Also US-Kurdish alliance in Iraq and possible Kurdish-state forced Turkey-Iran-Syria more together as all 3 states oppose such a state. In politics their is nothing like friendship, only political interest.
You see: There went something really bad the last years. Because USA is in the region and operating against turkish interest so far in Iraq. And USA is World-power so Turkey is tooth-crushing within its own boarders and thinks of possible prevention to such a Kurdish-state. Whilst playing Turkish Hamlet "Enter Iraq or not enter Iraq" with all possible consequences to US-Turkish relations. This has produced big sentiments against US acting in the region and US-Turkish relation in general in parts of turkish society begginning from Leftists to Rightist-fanatics. It is all complex.
You know: I am a nobody to demand things. But I know from the begginning that US-Kurdish alliance was a trump-card to keep Turkey punished and keep open to new demands :"Look: we can draw boarders and make fats in the region when you do not co-operate".
Of course we know this too. Which lets us think even further of US good-willnes to Turkey. It is extort. Turkey on the other side based on these facts showed USA: "Look, we can even cooperate with IRAN. Something like: The enemy of my "enemy" is my friend, even when the enemy of my "enemy" is my enemy, too."
Don't know if you understood.
So i will not pronounce here demands or some other things as i am nobody. My Government, my military did for sure told USA what it wants and what it wants to be corrected in Iraq, so we can co-operate on IRAN.
I said on this forum a long time ago that US-Turkish co-operation is better for both our interests. ans Recent visits of CIA+FBI showed that in Washington this view is getting again the upper-hand.
In Iran there live many SHIA Turkic-tribes beggining from Azeri, Turkoman and others. Only Azeris make 20 Mio of whole Iran. As i said before: When Turkey was Ottoman and made politics based on Reliogion we made war against them. Since Turkey is Secularistic we do not care anymore to Sunnite, Shia differences. BLOOD FIRST. Not religion.
We will give ISRAELIS Turkish air-space for attacks on Iran. Israelis even train in Turkish airspace and make spy missions from their to Syria and Iran. We have no interests in Israel to be "wiped-out" the map.
USA doesn't need Incirlik or Turkish air-space.
USA needs Turkey of other things: --->
This article has nothing to do with the thematic in first view but on second view
"500.000 visit Turkish fair in Iran after 26 years
A total of 500.000 people visited the fair organized 26 years after the Islamic Revolution in 1979 has opened in Iran.
A total of 500.000 people visited the fair in Tebriz in five days. While 30.000 people could not enter the fair site due to the crowd, the companies had to close the front side of their stands.
...
...
The majority of the visitors are the Azerbaycani Turks.
...
...
Eser Textile Company owner Mehmet Eser told, "Such an intensive interest shows the sympathy of those living in Iran feel for Turks. The visitor wanted Turkish flags from us. We will manufacture Turkish flags and T-shirts bearing Turkish flag patterns and send them to Tebriz. We established business relations; however, the most important aspect for us is the fact that they love Turkey so much."
http://www.zaman.com/?bl=economy&alt=&hn=27401
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm. Here comes into my mind Rumfsfeld's "they will welcome us with flowers" sectence in my mind. Sorry, for this sarcasm.
But Now: First this can only work when the "Air-Strike" only option is off the table and thre will be an invasion.
Second i am still convinced that Turkish troops alongside Pakistani and Egypt Troops will replace US-Soldiers in Iraq so USA has capacity to march into IRAN.
Third: I can be wrong, and USA will only use "Air-Strike" option.
As I said: Azeri only make 20 mio of Irans population. Turkey is still the "model" in the islamic world. Kurds make about 5 Mio in Iran aren't no model to anyone. Even not clear what Kurds are because no state, no system. And USA has anyhow Kurds under control as Their fate is in USA's hands in Iraq.
