|
Opinion |
 |
|
|
Turks Would Be Reluctant Ally
Against Iraq
" 'Why?' " one Western official involved in the exchange recalled the Turks demanding. " 'Tell us now. Don't tell us 24 hours before you send in the troops or something.' "They are," the official said, "a little suspicious." The suspicions have foundation, say Turkish officials, Western diplomats and independent analysts. President Bush and his top aides have made clear their intention to drive Hussein from power, and Turkey might be the most crucial U.S. ally if Bush opts for military means to accomplish his goal. Besides being the only Muslim member of NATO, a vaunted island of stability in near Asia and a secular role model to nations tempted by political Islam, the nation of 60 million is a logical staging ground for land and air operations against its troublesome neighbor to the south. But the last time the United States mounted a military campaign against Iraq, in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Turkey lost twice, sacrificing both its largest trading partner and a chunk of its peace of mind. The uprising by Iraq's ethnic Kurds immediately after the war, and the eventual Kurdish control of much of northern Iraq, unsettled a Turkish government that has been at war with separatists among its own Kurdish population for most of the last two decades. And in the long drum roll to a possible new campaign in Iraq, Washington has caused fresh unease in Turkey by conspicuously courting Iraqi Kurds as a major ally. Today, Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit reaffirmed his government's stance when he told Turkey's Anatolian News Agency that "before taking any steps linked to Iraq, the United States absolutely must enter into dialogue with Turkey." "We don't want to come into disagreement with the United States, but we also do not want war in our own region," Ecevit said. However, Turkey's strong public reluctance to support a U.S.-led war on Iraq is accompanied, according to diplomats, former diplomats and analysts, by a private acknowledgment that Turkey would not risk being left out if one in fact goes forward. The result is a tangle of overlapping sensitivities that U.S. officials have tried to pick through with care. "I have never met a Turk who likes this idea," said Mark Parris, a former U.S. ambassador to Turkey, referring to the prospect of a new Iraq campaign. "There won't be any problem on the technical side when people begin to move," Parris said. "The question will be how we deal with Turkey's requirements and . . . showing the politicians they won't be saps getting absolutely nothing for all their trouble." Before attacking Iraq 11 years ago, U.S. officials promised to offset the economic impact on Turkey by having leading members of the anti-Hussein coalition provide the Ankara government with $1 billion a year. But diplomats and others here say that none of the money has materialized, while the estimated cost to date of losing trade with Iraq stands between $12 billion and $50 billion. As they approach Turkey this time, U.S. officials have gingerly moved to address what one Western diplomat called "a certain lingering suspicion" of new promises. When Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz visited last month, he pointed out that Congress had appropriated $200 million to pay off U.S. loans to Turkey, on top of an overdue $28 million toward Turkey's expenses as head of the international peacekeeping force in Afghanistan's capital, Kabul. Diplomatic sources say that Turkish officials, while avoiding the term compensation, have also indicated an appetite for reductions on a $5 billion military debt, special consideration on arms contracts, and technology transfers on par with those the United States offers Israel, another close Turkish ally. Turkey also wants assurances that Washington will use its influence to ensure continued assistance from the International Monetary Fund, which already is lending Turkey $16 billion to shore up an economy that all but collapsed early last year. "Turkey doesn't want to convey that they're being bought off," said one Western diplomat, who noted a private U.S. expression of intent to provide the loan if the IMF does not. "On the other hand, they're sort of on a knife's edge economically and politically." But gaining Turkish support is not as simple as writing a check, officials and analysts emphasize. By all accounts, Turkey's overriding concern is its own sovereignty, which it saw threatened by the unexpected fallout from the last U.S. campaign against Iraq. In the Gulf War, the elder Bush administration encouraged Iraq's persecuted minorities to rise up against Hussein, including ethnic Kurds in the country's northern reaches. The uprising ended with Hussein still in power but the battered Kurds protected by U.S. and British warplanes enforcing a "no-fly" zone north of Iraq's 36th parallel. That protection offered a tantalizing taste of the freedom craved by the region's 25 to 30 million Kurds, who are spread across adjoining portions of Iraq, Syria, Iran and, most significantly, Turkey. Turkish Kurds had begun an armed rebellion in 1984, aimed at establishing a separate Kurdish homeland. The rebellion claimed an estimated 30,000 lives before subsiding two years ago, and Turkey's leaders are not eager to see a new regional war revive Kurdish nationalism. Wolfowitz and others have publicly assured the Turks that the United States will not allow a Kurdish nation to be carved out of Iraq -- or its neighbors. But Turkish officials nevertheless contend that the Americans have not satisfactorily explained how a fragmentation of Iraq would be avoided if Hussein were toppled. "What is your exit strategy?" asked an official in the Turkish Foreign Ministry. "We have to tread our way very carefully when thinking of a surgical or traumatic change in the region. The dismemberment of Iraq is not an impossible outcome scenario." The bottom line for Turkey is full disclosure both of U.S. war plans and current thinking on who, or what, will replace Hussein. When he met Turkish President Ahmet Sezer in South Africa last week, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell emphasized that Turkey would not be surprised by U.S. action. "They have to share their plans with us if they want our cooperation," said a second Foreign Ministry official. In addition, officials said Turkey also saw a need for an active hand in an uncertain enterprise that could carry profound consequences for its future. "Wolfowitz told the Turks, 'The train is leaving. If you're on it, you can help to steer it,' " one diplomat said. Yet Turkish officials, while not disputing that reading, emphasize that Turkey's cooperation will be necessary only if the operation goes forward. And it has not stopped them from trying to prevent that, despite public claims by prominent hawks in Washington that Turkey is on board. "The ability to say, 'The Turks are with us' is important in the bureaucratic struggle in Washington that must precede any action," said Bulent Aliriza, a Turkey specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. However, Aliriza said, Turkish cooperation "is not an endorsement" of a U.S. decision to attack Iraq again. "It's an explicit recognition of the decision." |