21 November 2001

1. „Analysis: Kurds 'caught in the crossfire'”, Saddam Hussein: "I can go back to the Kurdish cities whenever I want".

2. “Turkey nervous over US's Saddam scenarios”, one senior Turkish general says that Turkey may well use the strong support extended to US in its war against Afghanistan to deter Washington from strike on neighboring Iraq.

3. “Kurds’ demands should be met”, Algan Hacaloglu said, “Demonstrations of our Kurdish citizens for mother tongue, culture and right to identity should be approached criminally. These demands should be met.”

4. “Firsthand Experience”, Turkey’s struggle with Kurdish rebels could make them invaluable to U.S.-led ground forces.

5. “Bahceli critisize EU”, Deputy Prime Minister and the Nationalist Action Party (MHP) Chairman Devlet Bahceli evaluated recent developments concerning Turkey's accession period to the European Union.

6. “We cannot solve all the problems with 90 troops”, Opinion by Mehmet Ali Birand.


1. – BBC – „Analysis: Kurds 'caught in the crossfire'”:

Saddam Hussein: "I can go back to the Kurdish cities whenever I want"

By the BBC's Hiwa Osman

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein recently received a delegation of Kurds in which he told them that the only way to solve problems betwen the Kurdish and Arab "sons of the homeland" was through dialogue and wisdom.

But he also vowed to cut out the tongue of whoever refuses to enter a "calm dialogue" with him.

As Saddam Hussein was speaking, his troops were massing at the dividing line between the Kurdish-controlled area in the north and the areas still under his control.

These developments are taking place at a time when the US has accused Iraq of developing biological weapons in violation of an international ban.

Kurds' anxiety

And US Secretary of State Colin Powell has also warned of warned of possible military action against Iraq. He said that after defeating al-Qaeda: "We will turn our attention to terrorism throughout the world, and nations such as Iraq, which have tried to pursue weapons of mass destruction." An important factor in such attack could be the role of the northern Kurds, who have the only fighting force on the ground among possible opposition players.

But they view the latest developments with anxiety.

The Kurds are caught between the threat of an attack by the Iraqi troops if they decide to co-operate, and the risk of losing US protection if they remain on the sidelines.

The Prime MInister of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan Government (PUK) Dr Barham Salih said: "The political scene in the region is about to undergo major changes. Sooner or later, these changes will affect our area.

"It is vital that we prepare ourselves and seize this opportunity to secure a future for our people." Fearing reprisals from Baghdad in the event of an unsuccessful US attack on Iraq, the Kurds seem to be wary about co-operating with Washington.

Mas'ud Barzani, the leader of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) which shares power with the PUK, said: "We will not take part in any plan to change the regime unless our rights are taken into consideration."

Since 11 September, Iraqi Kurds and Baghdad have expressed opposing positions. Iraq is one of the few countries that has not condemned the attack nor expressed support for the "war on terrorism".

Critical decision

On the other hand, the Kurds in the north have extended sympathy for victims of the attack and expressed support for the US-led response.

If the US decides to attack Iraq, the Kurds will be faced with a critical decision.

So far the Kurds have not ruled out the possibility of talks with Baghdad.

Leading PUK figure Adel Murad told BBC News Online that dialogue between the Kurds and Baghdad is possible if it is conducted "on the basis of democracy and federalism for Iraq and an end to ethnic cleansing in the Baghdad-held Kurdish areas".

But the Kurdish terms of dialogue are unlikely to conform with the Iraqi president's - he has said that no-one can stop him from going to the Kurdish cities.

Dr Mahmoud Osman, an independent Kurdish politician, said: "The Kurds will have to be very careful not to become once more a victim of regional and international deals."


2. – Turkish Daily News – “Turkey nervous over US's Saddam scenarios”:

One senior Turkish general says that Turkey may well use the strong support extended to US in its war against Afghanistan to deter Washington from strike on neighboring Iraq

Lale Sariibrahimoglu

Turkey has for sometime been trying to downplay the scenarios written by William Safire, a senior and influential columnist of the New York Times, urging the U.S. administration to finish off Iraqi President Saddam Hussein as a second of phase of the United States`s ongoing war in Afghanistan against terrorism. But in the latest statement by U.S. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice on Nov. 17, leaving the door open for a strike against Saddam has once again made Turkey uneasy.

Similarly, any news article appearing in the local media quoting foreign sources or officials over Turkish links to terrorist Osama bin Laden or the Taliban, who have suffered major defeats in Afghanistan, makes nervous not only the Turkish civilian bureaucracy but also the Turkish military. One military source, speaking to the Turkish Daily News, argued that the local media could be more sensitive in the way they have been covering such stories establishing links between individual Turks and the terrorists.

A recent article covered widely by the Turkish media was about a Turkish assassination note being found at one of bin Laden`s training camps in Afghanistan, as well as two Turks detained in the region over links with the Taliban.

The reason for Turkish concern over possible U.S. strikes against Saddam stem from further impact of such attacks on the already fragile Turkish economy, which is witnessing the worst crisis since World War II.

Any links established between individual Turks and the bin Laden terrorists have also had the effect of discouraging tourists from coming to Turkey, who have helped bring revenue to the country this summer.

1991 Gulf War nightmare

When statements are being made in Washington over possible attacks against Saddam using the war against terrorism as a pretext, many in Turkey remember 1991 when the then President Turgut ozal opened Turkey as a second front for the coalition forces headed by the United States to thwart Iraqi occupation forces from Kuwait.

Ozal's famous statement that "Turkey will sew one and reap three," as a result of aiding the United States in its strikes against Iraq, has never turned into a reality.

Instead, Turkey lost Iraq as one of its major trading partners, as well as $40 billion or more as a result of decade long UN sanctions against the country. Added to that has been the acceleration of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) terrorism in the country's southeast, using the no man's land of Northern Iraq as a staging ground for attacks on Turkey. The State Planning Organization put Turkey's losses at $200 billion as a result of the 16-year old PKK terrorism campaign.

It was a huge relief initially for Turkey when the United States declared Osama bin Laden and his al- Qaeda network, harboring in Afghanistan, as a prime suspect instead of targeting its southeastern neighbor Iraq.

The catastrophic terrorist attacks against the U.S. targets on Sept. 11 followed by ongoing U.S. strikes in Afghanistan came at a time when Turkey has been trying to recover its economy and restart trade with Iraq, despite the United States's defiance.

Ankara deeply fears that next phase may be Saddam

Despite Turkish attempts to downplay Safire's provocative statements urging the U.S. administration to strike against Iraq as a second stage in the war against terrorism, a recent statement by Condoleezza Rice once again hinted that the U.S.'s intentions may become real and not a far fetched idea.

William Safire in his article on Nov. 19 in the New York Times recalled that a more realistic view of the danger to us of Saddam's continuance as dictator came yesterday (Nov. 17) from Rice, George W. Bush's national security adviser, on "Meet the Press," "We do not need the events of Sept. 11 to tell us that this is a very dangerous man who is a threat to his own people, a threat to the region and a threat to us. ..." The new hard- liners' heartthrob provided this unassailable logic: "There could be only one reason that he has not wanted U.N. inspectors in Iraq, and that is so he can build weapons of mass destruction."

Safire, in the same article, stated that (Rice's statement) was a clear signal that the decision had been made to reassemble a combination of the strong and the just to oust Saddam. If Rice reflects the president's mindset, Phase II in the war on terrorism is only a matter of time, Safire added.

A day after Rice's remarks came a U.S. statement on Nov. 19, identifying Iraq and five other countries as states that are developing germ warfare programs, but refused to say whether any may have assisted bin Laden in his quest for biological weapons.

Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John R. Bolton said the existence of Iraq's program was "beyond dispute," and North Korea's program is disturbing. It is also quite concerned about Libya, Syria, Iran and Sudan.

"The United States strongly suspects that Iraq has taken advantage of three years of no U.N. inspections to improve all phases of its offensive biological weapons program," Bolton said. "The existence of Iraq's program is beyond dispute."

What is Turkey's leverage over US?

The open question is what will be a possible leverage of Turkey over preventing the United States from striking against Iraq as a second phase of its war against terrorism.

From the very start, Turkey has given strong support to the United States in its war against terror, initially by opening the Incirlik base in southern Turkey for logistics support to the United States as well as other allies aiding the operations in Afghanistan.

One senior general, speaking to the TDN says that Turkey may use its support of the United States in Afghanistan as a card to convince Washington to stay away from Iraq.

Another senior general speaking to the press recently, however, was underlying the dilemma that Turkey has been facing in case the United States decides to strike Iraq. "If Turkey declared strong support of the United States against terror as a whole, how can it object a strike against Iraq if it comes up with a firm evidence over Saddam's involvement in terrorism," comments the same general, raising the difficulty of Turkey pursuing a double standard.

But then many Turks remember Ecevit's statement on Oct. 3 in reference to the U.S.`s presentation of evidence linking bin Laden to the attacks on Sept. 11. Ecevit was saying that "The fact that the United States found it persuasive, persuades us also." But if the United States is determined to attack Iraq, Turkey may this time seek real evidence supporting Iraq's link with terrorism, says one government official.


3. – Kurdish Observer – “Kurds’ demands should be met”:

Algan Hacaloglu said, “Demonstrations of our Kurdish citizens for mother tongue, culture and right to identity should be approached criminally. These demands should be met.

MEHMET OZGUL

Algan Hacaloglu, CHP (Republican People’s Party) Deputy Secretary General, expressed his views to our newspaper on the EU Commission’s evaluation of the Turkish National Program and linguistic and cultural demands of Kurds.

“Kurds’ demands are natural”

Upon reminded that cultural demands of Kurds living on Turkey by various peaceful activities and demands of the Kurdish students for a Kurdish education and right to identity in universities are obstructed, Hacaloglu stated the following: “It is natural for every people in Turkey of any origin and naturally Kurdish citizens to express their right to mother tongue, culture and identity on a peaceful basis.”

“Political power has shortcomings”

Hacaloglu continued to say the following: “But the political power has shortcomings. It originates from the hesitation and its criminal approach. These demands should absolutely be met.”

Hacaloglu commented on the amendments to the articles 26 and 28 of the Turkish Constitution as “positive but far from meeting the necessity.”

Pluralism, a need of Turkey

Emphasizing that various factors can effect the policies of European Union on Turkey, Hacaloglu had to say the following: “Turkey can develop a domestic peace only with cultural pluralism. Therefore cultural pluralism should be developed in Turkey in which people of various ethnical and religious origins live. Turkey will overcome it and it should overcome.”


4. – The Times – “Firsthand Experience":

Turkey’s struggle with Kurdish rebels could make them invaluable to U.S.-led ground forces

ISTANBUL/ by Andrew Finkel

The international war on terror has attracted no shortage of allies in the past month, but few are likely to prove more useful than Turkey. NATO’s only Muslim member not only has historical roots in Central Asia and close ties to the region today, but also happens to be the only country with recent experience in the kind of combat the U.S.-led coalition will face in the months ahead. Starting in the mid-1990s, clandestine Turkish special forces waged a successful counterinsurgency campaign along the country’s rugged southeastern frontier against a foe — Kurdish rebels — that bears a notable resemblance to the enemy in Afghanistan.

Turkey is also ready, more or less, to serve. Two weeks ago, the country’s fractious coalition government overwhelmingly approved the deployment of troops to Afghanistan, should the call come. The Incirlik air base is already refueling allied bombers and fighter jets. And last week Turkey emerged as a potential leader of a post-Taliban peacekeeping force.

The support comes with reservations, however. Domestic opposition to Turkish involvement is growing, and even politicians who back the effort are desperately worried that a widening war will target Iraq, which would destabilize Turkey’s eastern frontier. But the lure of closer ties with the West at a time when the country’s economy is in desperate need of foreign aid has gained the upper hand, for now. "Turkey doesn’t see this as just the Americans’ fight," Foreign Minister Ismail Cem told Time last week. "We too have suffered from terrorism. This struggle is ours as well."

The "terrorists" in Turkish parlance are the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (P.K.K.), and the country’s experience fighting them in the caves and high mountains along the Iraqi border over the past decade underscores both the pitfalls and opportunities of an Afghan ground campaign. Ten years ago, the lessons were mostly negative. Turkey was locked in a "dirty war" with the Kurds that had left thousands of civilians, militants and Turkish soldiers dead and a growing number of people sympathizing with the rebel cause.

Then in 1995 the top brass decided to try something new. Teams of lightly armed special forces were dispatched along the frontier and into Iraq itself, denying the P.K.K. their traditional strongholds and forcing them to fight even in winter. In a tactic called the tiger hunt, commandos worked in tightening concentric circles to trap their prey. "If you see five P.K.K.s, send in 100 troops," was the motto. At the same time, the government launched a "hearts and minds" campaign and an amnesty to fighters willing to come out of the hills.

By the late 1990s the "dirty war" was largely over and the rebellion quelled, though the 1999 capture of P.K.K. leader Abdullah Ocalan in Kenya doubtless helped.

Turkish special forces could play a similar role in Afghanistan, or perhaps train and supply opposition fighters from the Northern Alliance. Ankara already has strong ties with General Abdul Rashid Dostum and his largely Uzbek supporters. The least politically sensitive job would be to head up, along with other moderate Muslim countries like Jordan, a peacekeeping force in the event the Taliban are driven from power.

Further engagement, however, will call for careful management at home. Recent polls show up to 75% of Turks are against the deployment of troops and half are opposed even to the U.S. bombing. Islamic solidarity, never far below the surface, is on the rise. "It has been reduced to us or them," complained Cuneyt Ulsever, a liberal columnist. Even political leaders have qualms, especially about the prospect of targeting Iraq. Toppling Saddam Hussein, they believe, would trigger the establishment of a separate Kurdish state in northern Iraq and spawn similar separatist ambitions in Turkey.

Still, the country has good reasons for helping out. Spurning the U.S. now would isolate Ankara even as it is seeking $9 billion in debt relief to help tackle the worst financial crisis in decades. The vote to commit troops to Afghanistan took place just one day before the World Bank was scheduled to announce a bailout, which it subsequently did. In fact, Western leaders have been remarkably sensitive to Turkey’s delicate position, says Cem. "There has been no attempt to impose a moral obligation." Rather, he said, discussions have focused on how friends can help each other in a time of need. Sentiment aside, it appears that both sides have something to give.


5. – Cumhurriyet – “Bahceli critisize EU”:

Deputy Prime Minister and the Nationalist Action Party (MHP) Chairman Devlet Bahceli evaluated recent developments concerning Turkey's accession period to the European Union.

Charging that the EU was pursuing hypocritical and biased policies in its relations with Turkey, Bahceli said, "Countries which apply double standards in the fight against terrorism shouldn't dare to try to give lessons about democracy or human rights to Turkey.

" Criticizing President Ahmet Necdet Sezer's and Deputy Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz's recent statements on the EU Progress Report, Bahceli said, "Supporting the EU's stance or calling it "objective" ignores the EU's insincerity in its policies towards Turkey." Remarking that Turkey has yet to receive as much support as it has lent to its Western allies to date, Bahceli said that Turkey was much more sincere than the EU regarding the steps it takes and the sacrifices it makes. "

Most European countries continue to persist in embracing terrorists who are the enemies of Turkey. When these European countries demonstrate their failure to learn any lessons from the Sept. 11 attacks, this shows just how right is Turkey in its concerns."


6. – Hurriyet – “We cannot solve all the problems with 90 troops”:

Opinion by Mehmet Ali Birand


Certain circles think that we will get everything we want from the United States (Cyprus, European army, the EU, money, etc.) by sending 90 troops to the war in Afghanistan. Those who think in that manner do not know that the US is a super power and that it would not pay any bill it is presented with. The things Washington would give in return for the Turkish support are already known as well as the things Washington would not agree to give

In recent days a curious wind has been created.

A significant part of the press, academicians who speak on TV and politicians, display a curious kind of logic. I do not know whether the General Staff too has that kind of thinking. The others sound so confident. Some columnists or the newspaper officials who write the headlines seem to take the United States for granted.

Certain circles believe Turkey has done the United States an enormous favor in the wake of the Sept. 11 incident by giving it its support, by providing it with certain military facilities and by agreeing to send 90 troops to Afghanistan after so much hesitation. They believe that Turkey has made an enormous sacrifice.

Seen from Ankara's perspective, Turkey has made an "indescribable" sacrifice. And, under the circumstances, they believe that the United States is beside itself with awe and admiration, that the United States does not know what it can possibly do to repay this sacrifice.

None of them see that Germany is sending 3,900 troops, Italy 2,700 troops and France a combat force. None of them care about what Pakistan has done or about the fact that other Muslim countries such as Jordan and Indonesia too are getting prepared to join the coalition.

Some of the Turkish officials engage in wishful thinking from time to time, assessing the situation in a euphoric mood caused by Turkey's support of "incredible value."

Naturally, there are also those who do know about the facts.

The majority does not know that the United States is a super power, that it is happy about the support Turkey is giving but does not rely on Turkey's contribution alone, that it can conduct the war on its own should that be needed, and that, generally speaking, it determines its stance according to the changing conditions and changes its approach according to the overall conditions at any given moment.

Sadly, this mood is being "pumped up" with such vigor that the general public gets artificially-inflated expectations.

The widely-held conviction in those circles is that Washington will immediately intervene in certain issues on which Turkey comes under strain, throwing its weight behind Ankara:

Cyprus tops the list of these issues.

What is being expected of Washington is that it will support the confederation thesis (two separate sovereign states) which the Turkish side has adopted by abruptly changing its mind, having sought a federation for three decades, and that it will ensure that this formula will be accepted by the Greek Cypriots, Greeks, members of the United Nations Security Council and the European Union.

We are wrong.

Washington is against Turkey's confederation formula and it has no intention at all of changing its stance. The Americans are suggesting a pragmatic solution, something which would not be called a confederation while providing all the advantages of having a confederation. They accuse the Turkish side of focusing on the "form" and say that we fail to think of our interests in a pragmatic manner.


The second expectation involves the ESDP.

What is expected from Washington is that it will put pressure on the EU countries and make them accept the Turkish stance regarding the European Army.

On this issue too we are wrong.

The United States finds the Turkish General Staff's stance on this issue unduly rigid and wants it to be rendered more flexible.

There are also those things the United States is prepared to do

There are also those areas where the United States has rolled up its sleeves to express its satisfaction about the support Turkey is giving it:

Economic and financial support tops that list.


State Minister Kemal Dervis's latest visit to Washington has made that quite clear. The United States wants to save Turkey from economic collapse.

No one should doubt that.

And it has shown that it means business by helping Turkey secure a fresh loan of $9-10 billion.

However, this is tied to a condition: Turkey must sign an agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

They do not want to throw money into a black whole. They have no intention of giving money so that a succession of Turkish governments will be able to conduct politics with more ease, distribute baksheesh generally and get votes.

On the other hand, if Turkey tightens its belt for example by an inch, the United States is prepared to go two inches when it comes to providing Turkey with financial support. And it has openly proven that.


The second support is on the EU issue.

Washington definitely wants Turkey to form a tie with the European Union in this or that manner. It attaches importance to Turkey's having a relationship with the West not through Washington alone but by establishing a link with the European Union as well.

This is all.

Don't let us stick to groundless expectations.

We should do exactly the opposite. We must focus our policies on the two aforementioned areas in which our expectations can be fulfilled.

Let us try to sell the cards we have in our hands for a price that exceeds their real value. This is because the persons we face are as intelligent as us. And they are as skilled as us -- maybe more skilled than us -- in the realm of international bargaining.

If we know that we are not a "unique" asset in the world, if we keep our feet on the ground, we will not meet with undue disappointments. Do not say that I have not warned.