MSNBC reported that Seymour Hersh has uncovered evidence that Vice President Cheney operated secret assassination squads out of the White House by using military personnel without the knowledge of the CIA. Keith Olbermann, host of MSNBC Countdown discussed the report with Jonathan Alter. Alter said that details will curl your hair.
See article below
Posted March 11, 2009
To watch the video please click on:
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22194.htm
Investigative Reporter Seymour Hersh Describes 'Executive Assassination Ring'
By Eric Black
March 12, 2009 -- "MinnPost" -- Published Wed, Mar 11 2009 -- At a “Great Conversations” event at the University of Minnesota last night, legendary investigative reporter Seymour Hersh may have made a little more news than he intended by talking about new alleged instances of domestic spying by the CIA, and about an ongoing covert military operation that he called an “executive assassination ring.”
Hersh spoke with great confidence about these findings from his current reporting, which he hasn’t written about yet.
In an email exchange afterward, Hersh said that his statements were “an honest response to a question” from the event’s moderator, U of M Political Scientist Larry Jacobs and “not something I wanted to dwell about in public.”
Hersh didn’t take back the statements, which he said arise from reporting he is doing for a book, but that it might be a year or two before he has what he needs on the topic to be “effective...that is, empirical, for even the most skeptical.”
The evening of great conversation, featuring Walter Mondale and Hersh, moderated by Jacobs and titled “America’s Constitutional Crisis,” looked to be a mostly historical review of events that have tested our Constitution, by a journalist and a high government officials who had experience with many of the crises.
And it was mostly historical, and a great conversation, in which Hersh and Mondale talked about the patterns by which presidents seem to get intoxicated by executive power, frustrated by the limitations on that power from Congress and the public, drawn into improper covert actions that exceed their constitutional powers, in the belief that they can get results and will never be found out. Despite a few references to the Founding Fathers, the history was mostly recent, starting with the Viethnam War with much of it arising from the George W. Bush administration, which both men roundly denounced.
At the end of one answer by Hersh about how these things tend to happen, Jacobs asked: “And do they continue to happen to this day?”
Replied Hersh:
“Yuh. After 9/11, I haven’t written about this yet, but the Central Intelligence Agency was very deeply involved in domestic activities against people they thought to be enemies of the state. Without any legal authority for it. They haven’t been called on it yet. That does happen.
"Right now, today, there was a story in the New York Times that if you read it carefully mentioned something known as the Joint Special Operations Command -- JSOC it’s called. It is a special wing of our special operations community that is set up independently. They do not report to anybody, except in the Bush-Cheney days, they reported directly to the Cheney office. They did not report to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff or to Mr. [Robert] Gates, the secretary of defense. They reported directly to him. ...
"Congress has no oversight of it. It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on. Just today in the Times there was a story that its leaders, a three star admiral named [William H.] McRaven, ordered a stop to it because there were so many collateral deaths.
"Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on, in the name of all of us.
"It’s complicated because the guys doing it are not murderers, and yet they are committing what we would normally call murder. It’s a very complicated issue. Because they are young men that went into the Special Forces. The Delta Forces you’ve heard about. Navy Seal teams. Highly specialized.
"In many cases, they were the best and the brightest. Really, no exaggerations. Really fine guys that went in to do the kind of necessary jobs that they think you need to do to protect America. And then they find themselves torturing people.
"I’ve had people say to me -- five years ago, I had one say: ‘What do you call it when you interrogate somebody and you leave them bleeding and they don’t get any medical committee and two days later he dies. Is that murder? What happens if I get before a committee?’
"But they’re not gonna get before a committee.”
Hersh, the best-known investigative reporter of his generation, writes about these kinds of issues for The New Yorker. He has written often about JSOC, including, last July that:
“Under the Bush Administration’s interpretation of the law, clandestine military activities, unlike covert C.I.A. operations, do not need to be depicted in a Finding, because the President has a constitutional right to command combat forces in the field without congressional interference.”
(“Finding” refers to a special document that a president must issue, although not make public, to authorize covert CIA actions.)
jeudi 12 mars 2009
mercredi 11 mars 2009
Ex-PKK terrorists joining US army
Ex-PKK terrorists joining US army to fight in Afghanistan- Turkish TV
Some ex-members of the terror organization PKK are being recruited to the U.S. army to join military operations in Afghanistan, broadcaster Kanal D reported on Tuesday.
Those joining the U.S. army as career soldiers are the ones who fled PKK camps inside northern Iraq, the report said.
The Ex-PKK members recruited by the U.S. office in the northern Iraqi province of Arbil are briefly trained in Baghdad and given new identities before being sent to fight against Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, according to the report.
The issue was also included in the intelligence reports of Turkey's National Intelligence Organization (MIT), police and gendarmerie forces, it added.
Kanal D also had a Syrian-origin PKK member confirm the report. The PKK member said at least 15 of his friends have joined the U.S. army.
U.S. officials promised green cards to PKK members in return for their service, the report also said.
The PKK is listed as a terrorist group by Ankara and much of the international community, including the EU and the United States.
Turkey has been carrying out military operations against the terror organization PKK both inside Turkey and in northern Iraq.
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/world/11184415.asp?scr=1
Some ex-members of the terror organization PKK are being recruited to the U.S. army to join military operations in Afghanistan, broadcaster Kanal D reported on Tuesday.
Those joining the U.S. army as career soldiers are the ones who fled PKK camps inside northern Iraq, the report said.
The Ex-PKK members recruited by the U.S. office in the northern Iraqi province of Arbil are briefly trained in Baghdad and given new identities before being sent to fight against Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, according to the report.
The issue was also included in the intelligence reports of Turkey's National Intelligence Organization (MIT), police and gendarmerie forces, it added.
Kanal D also had a Syrian-origin PKK member confirm the report. The PKK member said at least 15 of his friends have joined the U.S. army.
U.S. officials promised green cards to PKK members in return for their service, the report also said.
The PKK is listed as a terrorist group by Ankara and much of the international community, including the EU and the United States.
Turkey has been carrying out military operations against the terror organization PKK both inside Turkey and in northern Iraq.
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/world/11184415.asp?scr=1
Southward movements by Kurdish northern Iraq alarms Baghdad
World Tribune
March 10, 2009WASHINGTON — The Kurdish autonomous region in northern Iraq has been moving toward a military confrontation with the government in Baghdad, a report said.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies said the Kurdish Regional Government in northern Iraq appeared to be expanding south in a move that has alarmed Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki.
In a report by former U.S. Defense Department official Anthony Cordesman, CSIS asserted that rising Kurdish-Arab tensions already blocked elections in four provinces in January 2009."The Kurds have shown an interest in controlling parts of the greater Mosul area and towns as far south as Sinjar," the report said. "There is a serious and potentially violent struggle for the control of Kirkuk and the oil fields around it, and for cities in Diyala like Khanqin and Jalawa.
This threatens to both divided the ISF [Iraqi security forces] along Kurdish and Arab lines, and weaken ISF efforts to fully defeat Al Qaida in Iraq."Titled "How Soon is Safe: Iraqi Force Development and Conditions-based U.S. Withdrawals," the report outlined the growing Kurdish threat to Iraqi stability.
Cordesman said the Kurdish-Arab confrontation could supersede the Al Qaida threat amid the struggle over control of the oil-rich region of Kirkuk."As yet, there is no agreed dividing line between Kurdish areas of control and the control of the central government," the report said.
"The Kurdish police force, and its Peshmerga militia, often operate independently of the Iraqi Ministries and beyond [U.S.-led coalition] MNSTC-I's advisory effort."The report said two of the Iraq Army's 10 division are "effectively Kurdish."
Another two divisions have been formed out of Kurdish security forces based in northern Iraq.
Moreover, Kurdish units in the Iraq Army were refusing orders from Baghdad. In August 2008, at least one Kurdish brigade in the Diyala province — the Peshmerga 34th Garmiyan Brigade — refused orders from the central government and said it would only honor directives from KRG.
KRG receives about 17 percent of the state budget from Baghdad."The Kurdish expansion of control outside of the KRG zone has alarmed many Iraqi Arabs and U.S. officials," the report said.
So far, KRG operates a military, police and security force — which total 100,000 — separate from the Interior Ministry in Baghdad. The report said the Kurds also procure weapons independent of the central government. In September 2008, a large shipment of small arms and ammunition arrived in Suleimaniya for KRG, a move that triggered protests from Baghdad.
The report said two rival political movements control separate elements of the Kurdish security forces. The PUK was said to be better trained and equipped than the rival KDP."The disposition, equipment levels, and training of the forces under the KRG remain unclear," the report said. "However, unofficial reports from U.S. military sources indicate that, in the PUK area at least, the Peshmerga have been organized into a brigade-centric infantry force with some armor and artillery and support units."
www.uruknet.info?p=52527
Link: www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2009/me_iraq0203_03_10.asp
March 10, 2009WASHINGTON — The Kurdish autonomous region in northern Iraq has been moving toward a military confrontation with the government in Baghdad, a report said.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies said the Kurdish Regional Government in northern Iraq appeared to be expanding south in a move that has alarmed Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki.
In a report by former U.S. Defense Department official Anthony Cordesman, CSIS asserted that rising Kurdish-Arab tensions already blocked elections in four provinces in January 2009."The Kurds have shown an interest in controlling parts of the greater Mosul area and towns as far south as Sinjar," the report said. "There is a serious and potentially violent struggle for the control of Kirkuk and the oil fields around it, and for cities in Diyala like Khanqin and Jalawa.
This threatens to both divided the ISF [Iraqi security forces] along Kurdish and Arab lines, and weaken ISF efforts to fully defeat Al Qaida in Iraq."Titled "How Soon is Safe: Iraqi Force Development and Conditions-based U.S. Withdrawals," the report outlined the growing Kurdish threat to Iraqi stability.
Cordesman said the Kurdish-Arab confrontation could supersede the Al Qaida threat amid the struggle over control of the oil-rich region of Kirkuk."As yet, there is no agreed dividing line between Kurdish areas of control and the control of the central government," the report said.
"The Kurdish police force, and its Peshmerga militia, often operate independently of the Iraqi Ministries and beyond [U.S.-led coalition] MNSTC-I's advisory effort."The report said two of the Iraq Army's 10 division are "effectively Kurdish."
Another two divisions have been formed out of Kurdish security forces based in northern Iraq.
Moreover, Kurdish units in the Iraq Army were refusing orders from Baghdad. In August 2008, at least one Kurdish brigade in the Diyala province — the Peshmerga 34th Garmiyan Brigade — refused orders from the central government and said it would only honor directives from KRG.
KRG receives about 17 percent of the state budget from Baghdad."The Kurdish expansion of control outside of the KRG zone has alarmed many Iraqi Arabs and U.S. officials," the report said.
So far, KRG operates a military, police and security force — which total 100,000 — separate from the Interior Ministry in Baghdad. The report said the Kurds also procure weapons independent of the central government. In September 2008, a large shipment of small arms and ammunition arrived in Suleimaniya for KRG, a move that triggered protests from Baghdad.
The report said two rival political movements control separate elements of the Kurdish security forces. The PUK was said to be better trained and equipped than the rival KDP."The disposition, equipment levels, and training of the forces under the KRG remain unclear," the report said. "However, unofficial reports from U.S. military sources indicate that, in the PUK area at least, the Peshmerga have been organized into a brigade-centric infantry force with some armor and artillery and support units."
www.uruknet.info?p=52527
Link: www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2009/me_iraq0203_03_10.asp
mardi 10 mars 2009
The importance of being politically aware among Iraqi Turkmen Youth today
When young people hear the word politics, it´s almost unavoidable to associate it with governments, politicians, and their hopeless attempts to make false promises to get the people´s vote and their apathy to the needs of their people when they do. These scenarios have been played out far too many times and it is quite disheartening for youth today, who choose to take solace in pop culture and feed off what the mainstream media has to offer them rather than brood over the uncertainties of the future (of course, that is also problematic, but that´s another topic to write about in itself).
It almost seems like a vicious circle that is woven to our social fabric. The negative representations of politics or politicians for that matter and the constant disappointments in governments play a big part in continuing that cycle or in other words "that" way of thinking among young people. Having lived most of my life in Canada, I can´t help but relate my experiences to a western view point throughout our schooling years; young people are taught to understand the importance of governments, laws, and political policies. They are taught to believe that a system of order is essential for any democratic society to function. Yet, when young people grow up to be a participating member of society, they get a dose of reality when they turn on their television or pick up a newspaper to read.
The notion that governments exist to implement a working system for their citizens is utopian understanding that is lost in textbook pages and has no relevance whatsoever on how things unfold in real life. As a result, they eventually come to realize and most of the time accept, the fact that they can never influence a change, as power is only concentrated in the hands of few elites who decide our fate, as well as other nations´.
The purpose of my writing is not to paint a gloomy picture and conclude with the idea that we´re all doomed. Yet, it is a mere attempt to remind young people, including myself, the crucial need for us to adopt a new perspective in our lives, one that is positive and promising and empowers us to be critical thinkers when exercising our political rights.
Despite the fact that politics can be a complicated concept and a very loaded term, it simply means the activity of exercising one´s power. We can be political in so many facets of life, that it makes so much sense to agree with Aristotle’s notion that it is in man’s nature to be political. Even if I walk down the street, wearing a T-shirt that says "Free Palestine"; I´m being political. We live in a world where sports, music, and even food can be used to make a political statement that it would be naive of any young person to assume that they can live their lives and not bother with understanding the current problems that plague our world. The point that I´m making here is that, understanding politics will help us understand our position in a collective global community.
In other words, in order for me to understand why my country is being invaded or why Turkmens are being misrepresented in Iraq, I have to understand who has the control of power, why their political interests are in conflict with ours´ and how we can attain our rights with such limited power. The political situation in the world made more sense to me after 9/11. That´s partly because I was at an appropriate age to understand why things were happening the way they were. After the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, and the rise of Islamophobia among Western society, as an Iraqi and Muslim, I had no choice but to be aware about the experiences I might have to face because of my association.
My experiences with politics have always been with trying to understand my identity as an Iraqi Turkmen living in a western society. My political identity is not static. In the sense, to westerners; I´m a middle eastern and to middle easterners; I´m different all together, because I´m culturally more Turkish than Iraqi. Whenever I encountered young Iraqis, they would be surprised to know that Turkmens make up 10-13% of Iraq´s population. Sadly, some of them don´t even know that we exist.
I´m not sure if we´re partly to be blamed for that as Turkmens always lived in exclusive communities or maybe the reason why we became so cocooned in our own communities was because of the after effects of countless regimes trying to silence dissent and try to assimilate us, instead of understanding us. The fact of the matter is, Turkmens in Iraq were always treated like second-class citizens and as a result of that, we never developed a sense of confidence when voicing our thoughts and taking political stance on issues concerning Iraq.
Of course, the despotic regimes and the non-democratic state of Iraq never gave the Turkmens the opportunity to freely make politics in Iraq as previous regimes were almost paranoid that fighting for our rights inherently would mean going against the government or becoming a separatist. However, even as we look back at history or even observe the Turkmens in Iraq today, it would be easy to conclude that Turkmens of Iraq never had separatist ideologies towards Iraq; rather they wished to live in a country that celebrated their Turkish identity and their proud heritage within the lands their ancestors once governed.
I sincerely believe that Turkmens played a great role in the advancement of these regions that is now modern day Iraq. Hence, it is only natural to desire the same success for modern day Turkmens living in Iraq today. Given the fact that we contributed immensely towards the Iraqi society, we have as much of a right to make decisions in Iraq as any Arab or Kurd. The means to achieve that is if we; the young Turkmens, realize our potential and future within Iraq.
n.bayatli@gmail.com
Toronto/Canada
dimanche 8 mars 2009
L'affaire "Pétrole contre nourriture" sur Arte
Pain, pétrole et corruption
Arte - Mardi 10 avril 2009 , à 20h45
Genre : Documentaire
Date de sortie : 2009
Durée : 1h30
Tous publics
Résumé:«Pétrole contre nourriture» : ce programme initié par l'ONU en 1996 visait à répondre aux besoins humanitaires de la population irakienne sous embargo. L'Irak devait vendre une quantité limitée de son pétrole, sous contrôle de l'ONU, et acheter en échange de la nourriture et des médicaments. En janvier 2004, un quotidien irakien publie une liste de personnalités et d'entreprises qui ont touché des pots-de-vin dans le cadre de cette opération humanitaire. L'ONU constitue discrètement une commission d'enquête indépendante, présidée par Paul Volcker, qui rend un rapport édifiant en 2005, accusant près de 2500 individus et sociétés internationales dans une trentaine de pays. Depuis, très peu de procès ont eu lieu et les mises en examen sont tout aussi rares.
Précisions liminaires en attendant l’émission
par Gilles Munier*
Pain, pétrole et corruption…Le titre, déjà en lui-même, indique le parti pris de l’émission. Il ne s’agit pas de « l’embargo » et de ses conséquences, mais d’un prétendu détournement, dès le départ, de cet embargo par les dirigeants irakiens.
Il ne faut pas inverser la cause et les effets - vrais ou fabriqués - pour occulter le génocide perpétré en Irak par les Etats-Unis et les gouvernements occidentaux.
Plus de 1,5 million, tel est le nombre des victimes irakiennes de cet embargo international.
Le gouvernement irakien demandait aux sociétés pétrolières de financer des opérations de lobbying pour obtenir la levée de l’embargo.
Le prix du pétrole étant fixé par les Etats-Unis, au plus bas, les « pots- de- vin » soustraits des bénéfices des entreprises, ne lésaient pas le peuple irakien.
La liste des « corrompus » a été constituée sous la direction d’Ahmed Chalabi et de la CIA. Elle a été traduite et diffusée par Memri, une agence israélienne de propagande anti-arabe.
Le quotidien irakien qui a révélé le « scandale » était en partie financé par George Soros, spéculateur spécialiste des campagnes d’intoxication médiatique.
L’enquête de Paul Volcker s’arrête aux portes du Pentagone. Pourquoi ?
Quid du pétrole vendu au marché noir, notamment via le Kurdistan de Massoud Barzani ? Une partie était-elle ensuite détournée vers Israël ?
Etc… etc…
Mis en examen il y a plus de 3 ans pour avoir « violé une résolution des Nations unies », il m’est interdit de sortir du territoire français, donc d’effectuer des recherches permettant d’assurer ma défense… et de travailler.
Comment se fait-il que la plupart des personnes mises en examen dans le volet français de l’affaire « Pétrole contre nourriture » circule à l’étranger, librement ? Tant mieux pour elles, et notamment pour le directeur de la société Total qui s’est rendu en Angola et en Syrie avec Nicolas Sarkozy et qui participera – peut-être - à une mission d’entreprises françaises… à Bagdad, en juin prochain, dirigée par Bernard Kouchner.
Mais alors, pourquoi ne me rend-on pas mon passeport ? Deux poids – deux mesures pour des raisons politiques ? Lesquelles ?
Au moins deux personnes impliquées dans l’affaire « Pétrole contre nourriture » sont décédées sans que justice leur soit rendue. Combien de temps faudra-il attendre pour que le procès ait lieu ?
* Secrétaire général des Amitiés franco-irakiennes
Arte - Mardi 10 avril 2009 , à 20h45
Genre : Documentaire
Date de sortie : 2009
Durée : 1h30
Tous publics
Résumé:«Pétrole contre nourriture» : ce programme initié par l'ONU en 1996 visait à répondre aux besoins humanitaires de la population irakienne sous embargo. L'Irak devait vendre une quantité limitée de son pétrole, sous contrôle de l'ONU, et acheter en échange de la nourriture et des médicaments. En janvier 2004, un quotidien irakien publie une liste de personnalités et d'entreprises qui ont touché des pots-de-vin dans le cadre de cette opération humanitaire. L'ONU constitue discrètement une commission d'enquête indépendante, présidée par Paul Volcker, qui rend un rapport édifiant en 2005, accusant près de 2500 individus et sociétés internationales dans une trentaine de pays. Depuis, très peu de procès ont eu lieu et les mises en examen sont tout aussi rares.
Précisions liminaires en attendant l’émission
par Gilles Munier*
Pain, pétrole et corruption…Le titre, déjà en lui-même, indique le parti pris de l’émission. Il ne s’agit pas de « l’embargo » et de ses conséquences, mais d’un prétendu détournement, dès le départ, de cet embargo par les dirigeants irakiens.
Il ne faut pas inverser la cause et les effets - vrais ou fabriqués - pour occulter le génocide perpétré en Irak par les Etats-Unis et les gouvernements occidentaux.
Plus de 1,5 million, tel est le nombre des victimes irakiennes de cet embargo international.
Le gouvernement irakien demandait aux sociétés pétrolières de financer des opérations de lobbying pour obtenir la levée de l’embargo.
Le prix du pétrole étant fixé par les Etats-Unis, au plus bas, les « pots- de- vin » soustraits des bénéfices des entreprises, ne lésaient pas le peuple irakien.
La liste des « corrompus » a été constituée sous la direction d’Ahmed Chalabi et de la CIA. Elle a été traduite et diffusée par Memri, une agence israélienne de propagande anti-arabe.
Le quotidien irakien qui a révélé le « scandale » était en partie financé par George Soros, spéculateur spécialiste des campagnes d’intoxication médiatique.
L’enquête de Paul Volcker s’arrête aux portes du Pentagone. Pourquoi ?
Quid du pétrole vendu au marché noir, notamment via le Kurdistan de Massoud Barzani ? Une partie était-elle ensuite détournée vers Israël ?
Etc… etc…
Mis en examen il y a plus de 3 ans pour avoir « violé une résolution des Nations unies », il m’est interdit de sortir du territoire français, donc d’effectuer des recherches permettant d’assurer ma défense… et de travailler.
Comment se fait-il que la plupart des personnes mises en examen dans le volet français de l’affaire « Pétrole contre nourriture » circule à l’étranger, librement ? Tant mieux pour elles, et notamment pour le directeur de la société Total qui s’est rendu en Angola et en Syrie avec Nicolas Sarkozy et qui participera – peut-être - à une mission d’entreprises françaises… à Bagdad, en juin prochain, dirigée par Bernard Kouchner.
Mais alors, pourquoi ne me rend-on pas mon passeport ? Deux poids – deux mesures pour des raisons politiques ? Lesquelles ?
Au moins deux personnes impliquées dans l’affaire « Pétrole contre nourriture » sont décédées sans que justice leur soit rendue. Combien de temps faudra-il attendre pour que le procès ait lieu ?
* Secrétaire général des Amitiés franco-irakiennes
What if the American people learned the truth? VIDEO
Ron Paul: "What if the American people learned the truth?"
A MUST WATCH VIDEO
Stop the alarm bells! It's not the return of the Ottomans
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=print&link=168976&yazarAd=
The government's continuous efforts to expand influence in the Middle East, Africa and the Caspian Basin have introduced a new concept into Turkey's extensive political jargon: neo-Ottomanism.
The notion is a catchy phrase that both arouses a proud nostalgia for an empire that ruled over this vast geography for centuries and a creeping sensation of a fear to return to a past where religious bonds surpassed national identity. But analysts caution against both and say a pragmatic desire to expand influence in the region should not be mixed up with ideologically charged imperialism.
The ruling AK Party is hardly a follower of the static Cold War era policy, when Turkey was firmly a part of the Western camp threatened by the Soviet Union on its eastern borders. It has forged ties with ex-foe Syria, rival Iran, initiated dialogue with Palestinian radical group Hamas and mediated in Lebanon and between Israel and Syria. It also advocates a regional conflict-resolution mechanism in the southern Caucasus that would include Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Last but not least, it has been seeking to expand influence in Africa, even at the expense of standing by Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir in the face of an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on charges of crimes against humanity.
This unconventional interest in the South has already led to speculation that Turkey is drifting away from the West, a charge the government firmly denies. But things took a more dramatic turn when Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan stormed off from a Davos panel in late January after telling Israeli President Shimon Peres that “when it comes to killing people, you know it well.” Erdoğan’s move was definitely the harshest protest against Israel for a recent Gaza offensive that killed more than 1,300 Palestinians in the coastal strip. And it quickly made Erdoğan the darling of Arab nations frustrated with the inaction of their own governments in the face of the plight of the Palestinians.
Some commentators in the Arab media said neo-Ottomanism was on the rise. In Turkey, Erdoğan was given a hero’s welcome upon his return from Davos, with supporters carrying placards that described him as “the conqueror of Davos.”
The combined effect of all these events was enough to create a wave of neo-Ottomanism at home. It went on to such an extent that an AK Party supporter hailed Erdoğan as an Ottoman-style sultan on a placard he carried during a ceremony to launch a Metrobus line running uninterrupted between the Asian and European parts of İstanbul earlier this month. That placard, said a commentator in the mainstream media, is as dangerous as placards calling for the army to intervene in politics, such as those carried by the AK Party’s secularist opponents in anti-government rallies in the recent past.
And an unlikely contributor in the debate, the head of the private intelligence institution Stratfor, George Friedman, poured more fuel onto the fire when he forecast at a meeting in İstanbul this week that Turkey would rule the former Ottoman territory, which includes almost the entire Middle East as well as North Africa, by the mid-21st century.
“Muslim countries are not looking for a leader,” said Egemen Bağış, the state minister in charge of Turkey’s accession talks with the European Union, in televised remarks last week. “We can only be a source of inspiration.”
The debate is reminiscent of the controversy surrounding the term “moderate Islam,” which some American policy-makers thought would best describe Turkey, raising questions over the AK Party’s commitment to Western ideals in foreign policy and secular principles at home. The government has firmly rejected the term “moderate Islam” and denied several times that its growing links with the East are at the expense of its ties with the West. In a recent meeting with journalists, Ahmet Davutoğlu, widely seen as the architect of the AK Party’s foreign policy, said the growing Turkish influence in the Middle East and Africa was an effective way to undermine the opposition of some European countries that have vital interests in these regions -- such as France -- to Turkey’s membership in the European Union.
“This region is an area where Turkey has comparative advantages, given its cultural and historical affinities. It is not rational to not utilize these advantages,” said Özdem Sanberk, a foreign policy analyst and a former undersecretary of the foreign ministry. Sanberk says in a dynamic society prone to polarization like Turkey, concepts -- such as neo-Ottomanism -- can easily spark confrontations. But any substantial claim that Turkish foreign policy is drifting away from a national framework to an imperial one based on religious bonds needs to be backed by credible evidence of imperialist ambitions.
“Unless you have imperialist desires, it would be irrational not to use the cultural, historical and geographical advantages that you have in this region,” he said. Attempts to expand regional cooperation existed in the 1970s, 1980s and following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, but none were accompanied by imperialist goals, he added. “Turkey’s foreign policy is dictated by the economic and strategic interests of the country,” he told Sunday’s Zaman.
Dangers of swimming in Ottoman waters
In a 2005 speech, Erdoğan said Turkey was a “core” country -- as opposed to a peripheral one -- that has the potential to influence a wide area at the intersection of Asia, Europe and Africa and that “Turkey ought to embrace its historic mission and take up a role that befits its rich historic background.” But he insisted this did not mean a change in the current “route” of its traditional foreign policy, emphasizing instead that the route will be modified in accordance with modern global realities.
But with a highly charged domestic atmosphere where division along the lines of secularism runs deep at home, the government may need to express its non-imperialist intentions more clearly than it does now to avoid further polarization. In addition to deepening the rift between the government and its secularist opponents, an Ottoman rhetoric may also serve to radicalize Islamic groups, says Yasin Atlıoğlu, a researcher at the İstanbul-based think tank Bilgesam. “Frequent references to ideologies like neo-Ottomanism and Islamism may lead conservative Islamic groups to radicalize and seek to expand their influence beyond the state’s control,” he told Sunday’s Zaman.
At the height of Israel’s Gaza operation, radical Islamic groups were at the forefront of protest demonstrations across Turkey. An ideological rhetoric representing Erdoğan as some sort of “caliph” defending Muslims’ rights may fuel their enthusiasm to be more active, according to Atlıoğlu.
In the Middle East, Arab leaders are also likely to be alienated by a talk of a resurging Ottomanism in Turkey and poison the atmosphere of cooperation growing between them and Ankara due to suspicions over Turkey’s possible expansionist intentions. “The government should make clear, especially to Arab leaders, that its policy does not include revisionist goals or objectives such as the creation of an Islamic union and that its policies are confined to political and economic cooperation,” he said.
08.03.2009
News
FATMA DEMİRELLİ
The government's continuous efforts to expand influence in the Middle East, Africa and the Caspian Basin have introduced a new concept into Turkey's extensive political jargon: neo-Ottomanism.
The notion is a catchy phrase that both arouses a proud nostalgia for an empire that ruled over this vast geography for centuries and a creeping sensation of a fear to return to a past where religious bonds surpassed national identity. But analysts caution against both and say a pragmatic desire to expand influence in the region should not be mixed up with ideologically charged imperialism.
The ruling AK Party is hardly a follower of the static Cold War era policy, when Turkey was firmly a part of the Western camp threatened by the Soviet Union on its eastern borders. It has forged ties with ex-foe Syria, rival Iran, initiated dialogue with Palestinian radical group Hamas and mediated in Lebanon and between Israel and Syria. It also advocates a regional conflict-resolution mechanism in the southern Caucasus that would include Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Last but not least, it has been seeking to expand influence in Africa, even at the expense of standing by Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir in the face of an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on charges of crimes against humanity.
This unconventional interest in the South has already led to speculation that Turkey is drifting away from the West, a charge the government firmly denies. But things took a more dramatic turn when Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan stormed off from a Davos panel in late January after telling Israeli President Shimon Peres that “when it comes to killing people, you know it well.” Erdoğan’s move was definitely the harshest protest against Israel for a recent Gaza offensive that killed more than 1,300 Palestinians in the coastal strip. And it quickly made Erdoğan the darling of Arab nations frustrated with the inaction of their own governments in the face of the plight of the Palestinians.
Some commentators in the Arab media said neo-Ottomanism was on the rise. In Turkey, Erdoğan was given a hero’s welcome upon his return from Davos, with supporters carrying placards that described him as “the conqueror of Davos.”
The combined effect of all these events was enough to create a wave of neo-Ottomanism at home. It went on to such an extent that an AK Party supporter hailed Erdoğan as an Ottoman-style sultan on a placard he carried during a ceremony to launch a Metrobus line running uninterrupted between the Asian and European parts of İstanbul earlier this month. That placard, said a commentator in the mainstream media, is as dangerous as placards calling for the army to intervene in politics, such as those carried by the AK Party’s secularist opponents in anti-government rallies in the recent past.
And an unlikely contributor in the debate, the head of the private intelligence institution Stratfor, George Friedman, poured more fuel onto the fire when he forecast at a meeting in İstanbul this week that Turkey would rule the former Ottoman territory, which includes almost the entire Middle East as well as North Africa, by the mid-21st century.
“Muslim countries are not looking for a leader,” said Egemen Bağış, the state minister in charge of Turkey’s accession talks with the European Union, in televised remarks last week. “We can only be a source of inspiration.”
The debate is reminiscent of the controversy surrounding the term “moderate Islam,” which some American policy-makers thought would best describe Turkey, raising questions over the AK Party’s commitment to Western ideals in foreign policy and secular principles at home. The government has firmly rejected the term “moderate Islam” and denied several times that its growing links with the East are at the expense of its ties with the West. In a recent meeting with journalists, Ahmet Davutoğlu, widely seen as the architect of the AK Party’s foreign policy, said the growing Turkish influence in the Middle East and Africa was an effective way to undermine the opposition of some European countries that have vital interests in these regions -- such as France -- to Turkey’s membership in the European Union.
“This region is an area where Turkey has comparative advantages, given its cultural and historical affinities. It is not rational to not utilize these advantages,” said Özdem Sanberk, a foreign policy analyst and a former undersecretary of the foreign ministry. Sanberk says in a dynamic society prone to polarization like Turkey, concepts -- such as neo-Ottomanism -- can easily spark confrontations. But any substantial claim that Turkish foreign policy is drifting away from a national framework to an imperial one based on religious bonds needs to be backed by credible evidence of imperialist ambitions.
“Unless you have imperialist desires, it would be irrational not to use the cultural, historical and geographical advantages that you have in this region,” he said. Attempts to expand regional cooperation existed in the 1970s, 1980s and following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, but none were accompanied by imperialist goals, he added. “Turkey’s foreign policy is dictated by the economic and strategic interests of the country,” he told Sunday’s Zaman.
Dangers of swimming in Ottoman waters
In a 2005 speech, Erdoğan said Turkey was a “core” country -- as opposed to a peripheral one -- that has the potential to influence a wide area at the intersection of Asia, Europe and Africa and that “Turkey ought to embrace its historic mission and take up a role that befits its rich historic background.” But he insisted this did not mean a change in the current “route” of its traditional foreign policy, emphasizing instead that the route will be modified in accordance with modern global realities.
But with a highly charged domestic atmosphere where division along the lines of secularism runs deep at home, the government may need to express its non-imperialist intentions more clearly than it does now to avoid further polarization. In addition to deepening the rift between the government and its secularist opponents, an Ottoman rhetoric may also serve to radicalize Islamic groups, says Yasin Atlıoğlu, a researcher at the İstanbul-based think tank Bilgesam. “Frequent references to ideologies like neo-Ottomanism and Islamism may lead conservative Islamic groups to radicalize and seek to expand their influence beyond the state’s control,” he told Sunday’s Zaman.
At the height of Israel’s Gaza operation, radical Islamic groups were at the forefront of protest demonstrations across Turkey. An ideological rhetoric representing Erdoğan as some sort of “caliph” defending Muslims’ rights may fuel their enthusiasm to be more active, according to Atlıoğlu.
In the Middle East, Arab leaders are also likely to be alienated by a talk of a resurging Ottomanism in Turkey and poison the atmosphere of cooperation growing between them and Ankara due to suspicions over Turkey’s possible expansionist intentions. “The government should make clear, especially to Arab leaders, that its policy does not include revisionist goals or objectives such as the creation of an Islamic union and that its policies are confined to political and economic cooperation,” he said.
08.03.2009
News
FATMA DEMİRELLİ
samedi 7 mars 2009
Iraqi Kurds on expansion path
REPORTS say that the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) has been raising its flags and deploying its military in areas outside of their official borders after US President Barack Obama announced his 18-month scheduled to withdraw the bulk of US soldiers from the country.
The Kurds of northern Iraq a long record of conflict the ousted regime of the late Saddam Hussein. They have been exercising autonomy under US protection from Saddam Hussein's authority since the war over Kuwait in 1991. And since the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq and ouster of Saddam Hussein, they have also assumed a high-profile role in the central authorities in Baghdad.
They run their own military and has negotiated oil agreements with foreign companies in defiance of the central government. Despite the Iraqi president being a Kurd, relations between the Baghdad government and the KRG are under strain.
The root cause is clear: It is known that the Kurds are marking time to exercise their options and stride towards realising their dreams to set up an independent Kurdistan in northern Iraq. They have never allowed this goal to get out of their sights and all their decisions and actions have been geared towards this end. They want the oil-rich Kirkuk region to be part of their sought-for state and are steadily bringing out demographic changes in the area to serve this goal.
They now explain that they fear that they would be subjected to persecution by the Shiite-dominated central government after the partial withdrawal of American forces by August 2010, and hence their move to expand their sphere of influence and authority.
Armed Kurdish guards have occupied cities and towns beyond the frontiers of the three- province autonomous zone that is ruled by Kurdish parties under agreement with the central government.
A report quotes a Kurdish military officer as explaining that "Saddam kicked out Kurds, Arabs came in. Kurds are back, Arabs fled. If the Iraqi army comes, they will stab us in the back and expel Kurds again."
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki faces a tough challenge from the Kurds, who have a large stockpile of sophisticated weapons and know how to use them effectively. Clearly, the Kurdish moves are in a coalition course with the Maliki government and this could ignite yet another civil war in the country when the Americans leave.
The International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based conflict management advisory group, has warned that opposing territorial claims could lead to military clashes.
"As US forces are set to draw down in the next couple of years, Washington's leverage will diminish and, along with it, chances for a workable deal," the ICG says. "The most likely alternative to an agreement is a new outbreak of violent strife over unsettled claims in a fragmented polity governed by chaos and fear."
Again, the onus is on the US to ensure that this does not happen. Washington, whose support was central to the Kurdish existence as an autonomous state during the Saddam Hussein era, should have the leverage necessary to restrain the Kurds; unless of course the Obama administration backs the disastrous proposal made by Vice-President Joseph Biden three years ago: Split Iraq into three. If Washington does not move with sufficient time in advance and deal with the Kurds, that is the natural inference.
http://www.godubai.com/gulftoday/article.asp?AID=25&Section=Editorial
The Kurds of northern Iraq a long record of conflict the ousted regime of the late Saddam Hussein. They have been exercising autonomy under US protection from Saddam Hussein's authority since the war over Kuwait in 1991. And since the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq and ouster of Saddam Hussein, they have also assumed a high-profile role in the central authorities in Baghdad.
They run their own military and has negotiated oil agreements with foreign companies in defiance of the central government. Despite the Iraqi president being a Kurd, relations between the Baghdad government and the KRG are under strain.
The root cause is clear: It is known that the Kurds are marking time to exercise their options and stride towards realising their dreams to set up an independent Kurdistan in northern Iraq. They have never allowed this goal to get out of their sights and all their decisions and actions have been geared towards this end. They want the oil-rich Kirkuk region to be part of their sought-for state and are steadily bringing out demographic changes in the area to serve this goal.
They now explain that they fear that they would be subjected to persecution by the Shiite-dominated central government after the partial withdrawal of American forces by August 2010, and hence their move to expand their sphere of influence and authority.
Armed Kurdish guards have occupied cities and towns beyond the frontiers of the three- province autonomous zone that is ruled by Kurdish parties under agreement with the central government.
A report quotes a Kurdish military officer as explaining that "Saddam kicked out Kurds, Arabs came in. Kurds are back, Arabs fled. If the Iraqi army comes, they will stab us in the back and expel Kurds again."
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki faces a tough challenge from the Kurds, who have a large stockpile of sophisticated weapons and know how to use them effectively. Clearly, the Kurdish moves are in a coalition course with the Maliki government and this could ignite yet another civil war in the country when the Americans leave.
The International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based conflict management advisory group, has warned that opposing territorial claims could lead to military clashes.
"As US forces are set to draw down in the next couple of years, Washington's leverage will diminish and, along with it, chances for a workable deal," the ICG says. "The most likely alternative to an agreement is a new outbreak of violent strife over unsettled claims in a fragmented polity governed by chaos and fear."
Again, the onus is on the US to ensure that this does not happen. Washington, whose support was central to the Kurdish existence as an autonomous state during the Saddam Hussein era, should have the leverage necessary to restrain the Kurds; unless of course the Obama administration backs the disastrous proposal made by Vice-President Joseph Biden three years ago: Split Iraq into three. If Washington does not move with sufficient time in advance and deal with the Kurds, that is the natural inference.
http://www.godubai.com/gulftoday/article.asp?AID=25&Section=Editorial
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)
