9 August 2001

1. "Israel and Turkey: An intriguing alliance", the Israeli-Turkish relationship is an alliance of military heavyweights who both suffer from a sense of regional isolation, says the BBC's Defence Correspondent Jonathan Marcus

2. "Motherland Party stands behind Yilmaz in row with the military 'Political decision making is duty of the elected'", junior partner of the three-way coalition government, Motherland Party (ANAP) stood firmly behind its leader deputy Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz saying "political decision making rests with the nation and with elected organs representing the will of the people."

3. "Germany approves weapons delivery to Turkey", fuse sale to Ankara no sign of arms-policy change, says Berlin

4. "Saddam warns West on Iraq flights", Iraq -- President Saddam Hussein has warned the U.S. against continuing to fly military aircraft over Iraq.


1. - BBC - "Israel and Turkey: An intriguing alliance":

The Israeli-Turkish relationship is an alliance of military heavyweights who both suffer from a sense of regional isolation, says the BBC's Defence Correspondent Jonathan Marcus.

The relationship between Israel and Turkey is one of the most intriguing factors to develop in the region since the end of the Cold War.

While neither country accepts that it is a military alliance as such, it undoubtedly has important security as well as political and economic aspects.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's visit to Ankara is all about bolstering bilateral ties at a time when there is growing dismay within the Turkish Government at the Palestinians' plight.

And the fact that the relationship has survived, despite Middle East tensions, underlines its importance to both countries.

There is a public and a private face of this quasi-alliance and it is only possible to speculate on the intelligence sharing and contingency-planning that may be going on behind the scenes.

Shared security concerns

Israel and Turkey were drawn towards each other because of shared security concerns - both countries worry about potential developments in Syria, Iraq and Iran and both are aware of the threat from ballistic missiles.

Ankara is eager to get US approval to buy Israel's Arrow anti-missile system.

It is easy to see what Turkey is getting from the deal - Israeli arms and military know-how are an important element in Turkey's modernisation plans.

Israel has upgraded Turkish warplanes, it is negotiating to upgrade Turkey's older US-supplied tanks, and this military dimension is only part of a much broader economic relationship linking the two countries.

Israel's arms industry, which is seen as essential in maintaining the country's qualitative military edge, has eagerly seized upon the Turkish contracts.

Joint exercises

Israeli warplanes have conducted training flights in Turkish air space and there have been joint naval exercises.

Israel and Turkey are the region's two military heavyweights and both can clearly benefit from these ties.

But the Israel-Turkey links must be seen in a wider geo-political context. Both countries see themselves as somewhat isolated in the region.

Turkey's efforts to join the EU have so far been rebuffed.

The intifada has undone much of Israel's sense of well-being in its relations with the outside world.

Triangular dynamic

Both Israel and Turkey are close allies of the United States, but both sometimes have their differences with Washington.

The Turks believe that the US is often unwilling to share advanced military technologies with Ankara.

And the current crisis in Gaza and the West Bank has clearly caused strains between Israel and Washington.

So there is a triangular dynamic, with both governments asserting their strong ties to the US but also emphasising their bilateral relationship as a means of diversifying their strategic contacts.
The Israel-Turkish relationship cannot supplant links with Washington for either government.

But it is nonetheless a mutually beneficial in an increasingly complex world.

With every sign that the Palestinian intifada will continue, it will be a priority for both Turkey and Israel to protect their relationship from disagreements over day-to-day events in Gaza and the West Bank.


2. - Turkish Daily News - "Motherland Party stands behind Yilmaz in row with the military 'Political decision making is duty of the elected'":

Junior partner of the three-way coalition government, Motherland Party (ANAP) stood firmly behind its leader deputy Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz saying "political decision making rests with the nation and with elected organs representing the will of the people."

The latest row between Yilmaz and the powerful military, who on Tuesday issued a rare and blunt statement criticising him, started last weekend with Yilmaz suggesting national security issues are used spuriously to block reforms.

Yilmaz told the convention of his ANAP last Saturday that Turkey suffered from a "national security syndrome" that thwarted efforts to steer the country towards Europe.

On Tuesday, the Office of the Chief of General Staff, in what political analysts described "the harshest ever" lengthy statement berating an individual politician, blasted the deputy prime minister, who has crossed swords with the military several times in the past.

"The important issue that needs to be considered is that there are those who, instead of carrying out their duties, are attempting to escape their responsibilities and their failures by attacking others," the military said.

While trying not to escalate the row with the military one the one hand with a remark that Yilmaz did not criticize the military in his controversial remarks, "In a democratic country, the legitimate forum for such discussions is politics, therefore political parties are the legitimate interlocutors of this debate," the party said in a statement.

"To interpret Yilmaz's words as targeting the armed forces is an exaggerated reading," it said, insisting that no single institution or individual had been the target of his words.

Mesut Yilmaz, who called for the national security concept to be debated and who subsequently received a ton of flak from the General Staff, has said his remarks had not targeted the military. The Motherland Party (ANAP) Central Executive Committee (MKYK) sitting in session for the first time following its selection at the ANAP congress at the weekend issued a statement to moderate the military's tough reaction to Yilmaz' remarks. "We were not addressing the military but the political parties. Our grounds for debate are legitimate," read the statement.

During his opening address at the ANAP Seventh Congress last weekend, Mesut Yilmaz said the biggest obstacle to the development of human rights and democracy in Turkey was the concept of national security. Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit, leading the coalition of which ANAP is part, announced he did not agree with these views. However, his comments were not enough to placate the military. The General Staff issued a statement the other day in which they directly targeted Yilmaz and leveled some serious accusations at him.

These are the remarks that got the military so angry:

"On the matter of obstructing work to integrate with the European Union there is one taboo that everybody knows about more or less yet about which they play three wise monkeys: national security facts. To be more precise, we can call it national security syndrome.

"Today the time has come pull the curtains away from this taboo. The national security concept is one that obstructs every step taken to give our state a sound future. Of all the countries in the world, only Turkey has been able to turn a concept that ensures the survival of the state into one that cuts off the arteries to it.

"The key for change in Turkey remains hidden by the concept of national security. Thanks to the excuse of national security, it has become practically impossible to take those steps that would improve our state's outlook and that would bring comfort and contentment to our nation. If Turkey wants to take just one step forwards, it has to be cured of this syndrome."

The General Staff said these remarks were "unfortunate" and put across its views, her in brief:

The Cabinet is answerable to Parliament for the provision of national security. This speech by a person who shares in this responsibility and that targets [these] bodies is groundless and thought provoking.

Whether the necessary steps to be taken for the future of the country are always a step in the right direction is indeed a matter for debate. If the steps considered being taken are:

going to make it easier for those warped characters who think of Shari'a (Islamic canonical law) to act, going to provide a legal basis for those groups trying to divide the country,

are going to result in concessions being made over the country's vital security, then these steps are not going to be steps forwards, but backwards.

The General Staff's statement also stated that nobody would be able to hide from their responsibilities and failures by assaulting others rather than doing their duty. It further stated that the country had been brought to the verge of bankruptcy, that those responsible for getting the country into this state had not had the slightest action taken against them, that national and moral values had been eroded, that a system of plunder had become acceptable behavior, that people with a medieval mentality had been carefully placed in the cadres of the state in a country that aimed to join the European Union and that politically stability could not be achieved because of the lust and ambition of individuals. The statement also noted that because the correct political and economic measures had not been implemented in a certain region of the country, the rise of separatist terrorism, ethnic nationalism and separatist movements had been unable to be forestalled. It said that the national security concept would not be shown to be the reason for all these adversities and said it was not possible to consider the bringing of a topic that should be debated at legitimate platforms to the attention of the world in the form of a complaint as an honorable approach.

Reply from MKYK

Rather than reply directly to the accusations levelled at him in the General Staff's statement, Mesut Yilmaz opted to have his party's MKYK issue a joint statement in response. As well as creating the image he has the full backing of his party, Mesut Yilmaz will reportedly make an announcement in relation to this topic when he appears on television tonight.

The written statement issued following the two-hour MKYK meeting said that just with all other political parties, the Motherland Party's congress was the most basis and legitimate platform from which to discuss all the country's problems and suggest solutions to them. It went on to say:

"Our party leader Mesut Yilmaz brought it to the attention at the Seventh party congress in his opening address that the broad interpretation of the national security concept was obstructing our efforts at joining the European Union. The speech made no reference whatsoever to any person or institution. This being the case, comments in the press to the effect that our party leader's remarks were aimed at the armed forces are far fetched and taken out of context.

"In a democratic country, the legitimate forum for such discussions is politics, therefore political parties are the legitimate interlocutors of this debate. As was stressed in the same speech, ANAP believes that the preservation of the unitary state structure and the secular regime are indispensable conditions. But we also believe that when preserving our national integrity and secular regime, the scope of rights and freedoms could also be broadened.

"Furthermore, We are also of the opinion that the broader the scope of rights and freedoms becomes the more social peace will become established and the structure of our state strengthened.

"Political decision making especially on matters of what steps to take for the future of this country rests with the nation and with elected organs representing the will of the people.

The Motherland Party will be honored to share the truths that it believes in with our nation from now on."

Mesut Yilmaz has a history of getting into short-lived scuffles with the military. During one trip abroad, Yilmaz criticized the military by playing a "pantomime" with journalists. He placed his hands on his shoulders signalling four stars and indirectly criticized the generals. However, when this incident was reflected in the press, Yilmaz said he had not implied the military and stood down.

During a visit to Diyarbakir, Yilmaz said, "The road to the EU passes through Diyarbakir" and this led to speculation he regarded Kurdish separatist sentiments warmly. When the military criticized him, Yilmaz said he had been misinterpreted. Yilmaz began his defense of the EU National Program by saying that certain circles were uneasy about it. When the military pointed out that they were the target of this remark, Yilmaz once again said the military had not been his target.

While Yilmaz called for the national security concept to be debated, he maintained the army was not his target and that he was addressing the political parties and thus he has taken yet another step back in the face of reaction from the military. However, by maintaining that his words need to be debated, Yilmaz is only taking half a step backwards this time.


3. - Frankfurter Rundschau - "Germany approves weapons delivery to Turkey":

Fuse sale to Ankara no sign of arms-policy change, says Berlin

BERLIN

Germany's government plans to continue following its current arms-export policy with Turkey, a Berlin Economics Ministry representative told the Frankfurter Rundschau.

German Greens party defence expert Angelika Beer also denied that the government's decision to authorise delivery of weapons fuses to Turkey indicates a general relaxing of the current policy.

The Bundessicherheitsrat or Federal Security Council (BSR) authorised the Nuremberg-based arms-maker Diehl to export weapons fuses to Turkey, a fellow NATO member, Berlin government circles unofficially confirmed Sunday. The government never comments officially on decisions of the secret organisation.

The request to authorise the fuse deliveries was made during the administration of former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl. Last spring, when the Social Democratic-Greens government that followed Kohl into office in 1998, had yet to issue a decision, Diehl took the case to court.

Berlin law-experts reportedly came to the conclusion that blocking the delivery would be legally impossible. Once that decision had been reached, the BSR - which includes the Chancellor's Office, the Foreign, Defence, Economics and Development Ministries - approved it.

After getting approval for the deliveries from Berlin, according to a report in the Frankurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, Diehl dropped its lawsuit - but the company still lost the contract. The delay had taken so long that a competitor got the job. But according to the Sunday newspaper, German arms-makers are taking the decision as an "important signal." The decision, word in weapons-making circles in Germany has it, indicates a general relaxing of standards in favour of the weapons industry regarding export policies.

Greens defence-policy expert Beer calls that view total rubbish that, at best, represents nothing but wishful thinking on the part of arms-makers.

The German government, Beer said, will continue its previous, restrictive policies, policies that require the human-rights records of countries wanting to buy weapons to be taken into account when making the the decision. That in fact is the very reason why requests to export weapons to Turkey need to be so carefully considered, said Beer.

Turkey is the leading recipient of German weapons and arms-productions facilities. According to the government's report, in 1999 Turkey received about 855 billion dollars worth of exported German weapons. The United States, Italy, Israel and the United Arab Emirates came in second through fifth. According to 1999's statistics, the German armaments industry exported 2.65 billion dollars worth of weapons. In that year, Berlin approved 9,373 export applications while turning down 85.

Whether the long-ongoing, most-disputed deal with Ankara ever becomes reality, is still an open question. Turkey's army is still evaluating a variety of battle tanks, including the German Leopard II. Plans to export a sample tank trigerred a hot dispute within the German coalition governent recently.


4. - CNN - "Saddam warns West on Iraq flights":

BAGHDAD

Iraq -- President Saddam Hussein has warned the U.S. against continuing to fly military aircraft over Iraq.

In Wednesday's televised speech, marking the 13th anniversary of the Iran/Iraq cease-fire agreement, Saddam urged Washington and London to withdraw their forces from the Persian Gulf region, saying Baghdad was entitled to upgrade its air defence systems.

The Iraqi president's comments came a day after British and U.S. planes bombed an Iraqi multiple rocket launcher in the north of the country.

He said: "If you care that your pilots and your aircraft are not harmed by the weapons of the high-spirited freedom fighters of great Iraq, then take your aircraft and battleships and go home."

Washington said last week Iraq had upgraded its air defence network against western aircraft policing the no-fly zones in the north and south of the country.

But Saddam said the U.S. was using Iraq's defensive arsenal as an excuse to attack the country. He likened this to the launch of the Gulf War in 1991 and similar attacks on the country that followed.

"Do you know the pretext this time? (Washington) is saying that Iraq is threatening the American aircraft of aggression, which break through its air, trespassing upon its skies, sovereignty, land, people and wealth," Saddam said.

Northern and southern no-fly zones were put in place over Iraq following the 1991 Gulf War as part of an effort to prevent the Baghdad government of Saddam from persecuting the minority Shiite Muslims in the south and the Kurdish population in northern Iraq.