Turkey, Israel aim to forgive and
forget By K Gajendra Singh
Before returning home, Israeli Deputy Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert, who was in Ankara in mid-July to
mend Israel's deteriorating relations with Turkey, said,
"I was reassured of the continuity and stability of
relations." The visit for an economic joint commission
meeting by Olmert was the first high-level contact after
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan repeatedly
characterized Israel's policy in Gaza as "state
terrorism".
Israel would
have normally reacted sharply, but it needs Turkey, its only
friend in the region, with whom it has built up
close and almost alliance-like relations. Olmert's visit began
on a wrong note with an "appointment crisis" with
Erdogan, who left Ankara for a vacation a few hours before
Olmert's arrival. Israel said Olmert's visit could not be
postponed as he was busy in Brussels. It was just as
well. In his May 25 meeting with Israeli Infrastructure
Minister Yousef Paritzky, Erdogan asked the Israeli
minister: "What is the difference between terrorists who
kill Israeli civilians and Israel, which also kills
civilians?"
But it was an article
in New Yorker magazine by veteran US journalist
Seymour Hersh about Israel providing training to peshmarga
militias in northern Iraq and running covert operations
in neighboring countries that revealed the brewing
differences between Turkey and Israel. The media reports were denied
by both Israel and the Kurdish leadership in northern Iraq.
But Turkey was far from convinced. Israel's case was
not helped by other reports that they were
infiltrating agents into Iran's clandestine nuclear-weapons program
for information for possible preemptive strikes by the
Israeli air force, believing that Tehran is about a year
away from a breakthrough in that program.
Israel
would prefer a weak and decentralized Iraq, if not a
divided one. According to Beirut's Daily Star of July
17, "It appears that Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, one
of Erdogan's closest confidants, was behind the leak on
Israeli interference in Kurdistan, to demonstrate
Ankara's deepening anxiety that Kurdish aspirations of
independence will be fueled by Israeli interference.
Indeed, the US debacle in Iraq is driving neighbors
Turkey, Syria and Iran into each other's arms as all
fear chaos in Iraq in the coming months."
It added:
"Erdogan's government has embarked upon a high-profile
diplomatic effort to bolster relations with the
Arab and Muslim world, which were blighted by Israel's
1996 military agreements with Turkey. Ankara has
settled its disputes with Syria and is seeking to normalize
its often fraught relations with Iran." Turkey temporarily
withdrew its ambassador and consul general
from Israel. Relations took a turn for the worse when
the Israeli airline El Al had to suspend for two weeks
six weekly flights to Turkey from June 24 in a row over
security at Istanbul airport.
Annual trade
between the two countries now amounts to US$1.4 billion,
excluding the defense sector. Last year more than
300,000 Israeli tourists (8% of the population) visited
Turkey. Israelis find Turkey safe for vacations to escape
tensions at home. During Paritzky's visit, Turkey's
Zorlu Holding and Israeli Dorad Energies signed an $800
million deal for the construction of three power plants
in Israel. In March, the two sides signed an agreement
for Turkey to sell to Israel more than 50 million cubic
meters of water annually for the next 20 years.
Strained relations between Turkey and
Israel caused serious concern in the United States. President George
W Bush asked Erdogan "to tighten Turkey's
relationship with Israel". Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronot
said Washington's concerns were conveyed by Bush in
Ankara prior to the June North Atlantic Treaty
Organization summit in Istanbul. It added that Bush
stressed that friendly relations between Turkey and
Israel would "contribute towards the best interests of
the United States and expressed concern that an
escalation in tension may spark instability in the
Middle East".
Soner Cagaptay of the Washington
Institute for Near East Policy commented recently, "The
groundwork of the Turkish-Israeli relationship as it
stands in Turkey is eroding. It's too early to be
alarmist, but I would say that the relationship is under
a serious challenge."
"What once was a marriage
of love has become a marriage of convenience," said Dr
Anat Lapidot-Furilla, a research fellow at Hebrew
University's Truman Institute in Jerusalem. "It is
obvious that the 'strategic alliance' is in a period of
erosion," commented Turkish columnist Erdal Guven in
Radikal.
India-Israel-Turkey
relations When questioned by journalists during
his visit to Turkey last September, whether the US was
working to create a new axis among India, Turkey and
Israel, Indian prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee
replied in the negative, but added that India was
expanding its defense cooperation to a higher level. The
question was posed because Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon had visited India a few weeks earlier, during
which a number of defense cooperation agreements were
signed and the decades-long relationship between Turkey
and Israel had blossomed almost to the level of an
alliance.
In spite of a new Congress-led
United Progressive Alliance government in New Delhi,
defense cooperation between Israel and India is not likely to
be affected. Indian Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee
said India's security considerations were paramount and
that its military relations would be guided accordingly.
Deterioration in Turkish-Israeli
relations When Erdogan publicly criticized Sharon's
policies in the Occupied Territories, accusing Israel
of "state terrorism", members of his ruling Justice
and Development Party (AKP), which has Islamic roots,
were even harsher, lambasting US policies in Iraq.
The Turkish-Israeli relationship reached a low point
when Erdogan turned down an invitation to visit Israel
and temporarily withdrew his ambassador and consul
general from Israel.
Then the New Yorker
revelations made the simmering differences public. Turks
were now aware of Israeli activities in north Iraq. On
June 23, the Israeli ambassador to Turkey, Pini Aviv,
denied the New Yorker report that Israel took advantage
of the US occupation of Iraq by expanding the Israeli
presence in northern Iraq. He reassured the Turkish
Foreign Ministry that Israel had decided long ago not to
meddle in Iraqi affairs. Foreign Minister Gul accepted
Israeli denials. "The Israelis tell us those allegations
are not true. But everybody understands regional and
Turkish sensitivity to this issue, so we have to believe
what we are told," the semi-official Anatolia news
agency quoted Gul as saying. "I hope our trust [of
Israel] won't prove wrong," he added.
Earlier, Turkish media reported that
former Israeli Foreign Ministry undersecretary Alon Liel said that
"the idea of an independent Kurdish state was
not distressing Israel, but added, as Israel was aware of
Turkey's sensitivities on this issue there was no attempt
by Israel in that direction". Turkish media also
reported that Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom,
while briefing members of the Israeli parliament's
Foreign Relations and Defense Committee, said the relations
between Turkey and Israel should be evaluated from three
angles. These were security, economic cooperation and
tourist activities. "We should place priority on
protecting our strategic relations with Turkey; however,
Israel may no longer wait to answer criticisms [of state
terrorism] leveled by the Turkish premier," said the
Israeli minister.
Turkey's Kurdish
problems Turkey has serious problems with
its own Kurds, who form 20% of the population. But
after five years of comparative peace and quiet
in Turkey's southeast, there is now some upsurge in violent
rebel activity. The Kurdish rebellion since 1984 against
the Turkish state, led by Abdullah Ocalan of the
Marxist Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), has cost more than 35,000
lives, including 5,000 soldiers. To control and
neutralize the rebellion, thousands of Kurdish villages
were bombed, destroyed, abandoned or relocated; millions
of Kurds were moved to shanty towns in the south and
east or migrated westward.
The economy of
the region was shattered. With a third of the Turkish
army tied up in the southeast, the cost of countering
the insurgency at its height amounted to between $6
billion and $8 billion a year. Whenever there has been chaos and
instability in north Iraq, as during the Iraq-Iran War
in the 1980s or after the 1991 Gulf War, PKK activity
has picked up in Turkey.
The rebellion died down
after the arrest and trial of Ocalan in 1999, when a
ceasefire was declared by the PKK. After a Turkish court
commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence passed
on Ocalan in 2002 and parliament granted rights for the
use of the Kurdish language, some of the root causes of
the Kurdish rebellion were removed. TV broadcasts in
Kurdish have already begun. Until the mid-1980s, even
the use of the word Kurd was taboo and could lead to
imprisonment.
The PKK shifted most of its 4,000 cadres
to northern Iraq. But they refused to lay down arms
as required under a new Turkish "repentance law" as it
provided only partial immunity. Many remained ensconced
along the border between Iraq and Iran. The United
States' priority to disarm PKK cadres, despite promises to
Turkey, has not been very high. It has its arms full of
troubles in Sunni and Shi'ite Iraq. In fact, the US
wants to reward Iraqi Kurds, who have remained loyal and
peaceful. But Iraqi Kurds have been ambivalent toward
the PKK, helping them at times.
Ankara
has entered northern Iraq from time to time - despite
protests - to attack PKK bases and its cadres and keeps
many thousand troops in the region. Ankara also said it
would regard an independent Kurdish entity as a cause
for war and strongly opposes Iraqi Kurdish control of
the oil-rich northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk by forced ethnic
migrations to change the demographics of the city.
Turkey fears that any moves to bolster Kurdish autonomy
in Iraq could pave the way to the formation of a Kurdish
state in Iraq and eventually fuel separatism among its
own Kurds. Turkey also uses the pretext of protecting
the rights of its ethnic cousins the Turkmens,
traditionally settled around Kirkuk.
The roots
of the Kurdish problem were sown during the decline of
the Ottoman Empire and the birth of the Turkish Republic
after World War I, when northern Iraqi Kurdistan was
detached from the Ottoman Kurdish region by the British
and joined with the Arab provinces of Baghdad and Basra
to create Iraq, because of oil reserves around Kirkuk.
Northern Iraq was declared part of the Turkish republic by
its founders led by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. It has been a
Turkish claim and dream to retrieve this land. But since
the fierce - and growing - Iraqi resistance to US
occupation, Turkey has toned down the rhetoric.
Olmert's visit to Ankara Ehud
Olmert is an influential figure in the Israeli cabinet and
is in charge of the Ministry of Industry, Trade and
Labor. Apart from a meeting with President Ahmet Necdet
Sezer, he had a "friendly, sincere and serious discussion"
with Gul. Olmert said that "Gul repeated again the
commitment of Turkey to carry on relations with Israel on
the friendly basis as in the past". Olmert added
that Israeli officials would soon visit Turkey to
"continue the dialogue that we started". He also assured
the Turkish leaders that Israel was not engaged in
any relationship with Kurds in northern Iraq that
could jeopardize Turkish interests.
Gul made no
public comments, but many analysts believe that Turkey
is reassessing relations that have been so close.
Erdogan offered a warm reception to Syria's visiting
premier, Naji al-Otri, hours before Olmert's arrival,
which Gul said was just a coincidence. An important
Iranian delegation was also in town. In an interview
with CNN-Turk television, Olmert played down Erdogan's outbursts and his
not being able to meet with him. "The two
countries enjoy economic relations that are constantly
growing deeper. Our relations are stable and will keep
on growing. Israel wants to maintain its strategic ties
with Turkey," said Olmert. He also denied reports that
Israeli agents were operating in northern Iraq and
providing training to Iraqi Kurdish peshmargas. "Israel
has no relations with Kurds in the north of Iraq.
Turkish authorities know about all the details. We want
a united Iraq. We would never act against the interests
of Turkey," Olmert told CNN-Turk.
Israel
wants faster Gaza pullout In Olmert's talks
with Gul, apart from bilateral relations, the two sides
focused on Turkey's role in the Middle East peace
process and recent developments. Olmert said that Israel
considered Turkey a powerful force for stability in the
Middle East. "Turkey would play an important role and
would be a great power in the region," he added. Olmert
also informed Gul about plans for the Israeli army
withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, but cautioned that
preparations would require some time. "One must
understand that pulling out the settlements is not a
simple operation. It has to be carefully prepared, and
it takes time. We are in favor of accelerating the
preparations anyway if it is possible, so we shall see,"
he said.
Gul on the other hand said,
"Sustainable peace in the Middle East should be provided
immediately. Turkey is ready to do its best." He
reiterated Turkey's readiness to mediate with a view to
finding a solution to the Middle East conflict. Olmert
told the daily Sabah that Israel proposed setting up a
telephone hotline between Israel and Turkey to help
avoid further tensions between the two allies. Israel
was willing to give detailed information about their
policies on a daily basis.
Yilmaz Oztuna wrote
in Turkiye that "rescuing Palestinians from oppression
and forging an Arab-Israeli peace is a mission
impossible. Former US president Bill Clinton couldn't
manage it. This knot won't be untied any time soon. We
don't have the power to be a Middle East peace broker.
Even if we had it, this would go against our interests.
Anyway, what Mideast country would ask us to serve as
mediator? These are hard political realities, not stuff
for romantics and idealists." Yes, but the Turkish offer
to mediate in Middle East is a policy change brought in
by the Erdogan government - from one of benign neglect.
Once annoyed that there were El Al planes in Turkey,
former Turkish president Turgut Ozal told the visiting
Saudi foreign minister that it was Turkish policy not to
meddle in disputes of its former subjects.
Omert meets with Turkish media
Olmert was more assertive in his breakfast meeting
with Turkish journalists. When asked whether Turkey would
undertake a role to find a solution to
the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, Olmert said Israel was carrying
out unilateral action (withdrawal from Gaza and parts
of the West Bank) as setting up a dialogue would be a
waste of time. This was to change the situation in the
region. Neither Turkey nor the United States could do
much now, he said, adding that Turkey would play an
important role in future to provide stability and
promote democracy in the region.
Stressing
that the unilateral withdrawal of Israel from the Gaza
Strip was of historic importance, Olmert said it was
being achieved under Israel's Likud Party leadership.
When questioned on relations between Israel and Syria,
Olmert said Israel gave priority to withdrawal from the
Gaza Strip and the formation of a coalition government.
Asked about the West Bank barrier, recently ruled as a
violation of international laws by the International
Court of Justice, Olmert said it was a purely defensive
measure. "Once the terror ends, the fence will be
removed. The fence is reversible, death is not" - the
standard Israeli line.
Olmert and
his Turkish counterpart for the Joint Economic
Committee meeting, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Minister Sami
Guclu, set an ambitious goal of doubling two-way trade.
Olmert said an effort would be made to create a
better investment climate for Turkish companies, which
were doing well in Israel. He showed interest in
energy projects as part of the Southeastern Anatolia Project
(the project is in Turkey's Kurdish region across Iraqi
Kurdistan). Other areas identified for cooperation were
in technology, telecommunication, agriculture and
infrastructure.
Recent changes in Turkey
Erdogan's AKP emerged from the ashes of
four Islamic parties, banned earlier by the
secular establishment led by the armed forces, but it now
feels more secure. Taking advantage of the European
Union requirement to harmonize Turkey's system to
Copenhagen criteria, the AKP has successfully sidelined
the military, which had exercised power through
its domination of the National Security Council (NSC).
From a top policymaking forum, the NSC has now been
reduced to an advisory role. Compared with earlier regimes
perceived as corrupt, the AKP has further strengthened
itself by following transparent governance. It did very
well in April municipal elections.
There is a
clear erosion in the strategic relationship between
Turkey and Israel, which denotes a decline of the
Turkish military in politics, said Amnon Barzilie in
Haa'rez. A decision to put Turkey on a course toward EU
membership would strengthen Erdogan, and weaken the
military, according to the Israeli Defense Ministry. EU
membership would mean that the Turkish government would
wield all its influence to make arms deals with EU
countries, instead of Israel.
Since 1996, when the strategic dialogue between Israel
and Turkey began, numerous deals were signed with
the Israeli arms industry to "punish" EU countries that
refused EU membership to Turkey, the Israeli defense
establishment says. In December, the heads of the EU
will decide on a date for Turkey to begin accession
talks, but full membership is unlikely soon.
But an EU decision to delay membership for
Turkey would strengthen the Turkish military, which could
even depose Erdogan and call for new elections. One of the
first moves would then be a large arms deal with Israel.
Now the Turkish military has no choice but to sit
tight. Erdogan's harsh criticism of Israel's actions in
the territories was a powerful expression of that
change. But Turkey still looks at Israel as its partner in that
part of the world and, therefore, where security and
economic interests are concerned, there would be no
change for the worse. Israeli defense analysts noted
that the US sees strategic importance in Turkey's
joining the EU, as it regards Turkey as a model to prove
that there is no contradiction between a Muslim state
and a democratic one.
Dr Alon Liel, chairman of
the Turkey-Israel Chamber of Commerce, believes that the
Turkish army is getting weaker, but that the Defense
Ministry is suffering from fixed ideas and indifference.
"It's true that in the short term Turkey's entrance into
the EU will harm arms sales to Israel, but the
implications for the Middle East will be so dramatic
that in the final analysis it will work to benefit
Israel," Liel said.
Without question, the
Iraq war and, in particular, developments in northern
Iraq have kindled a rapprochement between Turkey and Iran
and Turkey and Syria, in spite of US opposition. Turkey
now pursues a strategy of strengthening its ties
with countries in the region. Since the AKP's coming to
power two years ago, Turkey has strengthened relations
with other Eastern countries, while making all efforts
to fulfill the Copenhagen criteria to join the EU.
EU countries to some extent are trying to maintain
their relationship with Tehran and Damascus. A
Turkish diplomat said this should be evaluated not as
opposition to the United States, but as a result of
recent developments.
India-Israel defense
cooperation Relations between India and Israel
are now low-key. Even the recently ousted Bharatiya
Janata Party-led (BJP) Indian government had balanced
Sharon's September visit last year by receiving a week
earlier Palestinian Foreign Minister Nabil Sha'ath, as
President Yasser Arafat was under siege. Two days before
Sharon's visit, a senior Indian official said, "We accept
and recognize Yasser Arafat as the president of
Palestine."
There were many write-ups in the
Indian media against Sharon's visit and his policies.
Opposition parties from the left of the center, ie
communist parties, the Samajwadi Party, the Rashtriya
Janata Dal and the Janata Dal (S), participated in
protests against the visit. The Congress party, then in
opposition, did not join in the protests, but made it
clear that the party's position of supporting the
Palestinian cause and an independent state of Palestine
remained undiluted.
But India's defense
cooperation with Israel continues, albeit unobtrusively.
India-Israel military trade is now estimated to have
crossed the $10 billion mark. The last agreement was for
five Phalcon airborne early warning and control systems
in a $1.5 billion deal.
A few days ago,
a delegation of Israel's military-industrial
complex visited Delhi on the heels of visits by senior
Indian military officials, including the vice chief of
army staff, Lieutenant-General Shantonu Choudhary, and
Vice Admiral Arun Prakash, the next naval chief. This is the
first senior Israeli defense delegation since the
Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government took
over. The Congress' major ally, the left, has been
critical of growing ties with Israel.
US-Israel-India axis The idea of a
so-called tripartite US-Israel-India axis was mooted
after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the US and was
publicly broached by India's national
security adviser,
Brajesh Mishra,
in Washington at the annual meeting of
the American Jewish Committee, where many US
congressmen were also
present.
After emphasizing the similarities among the
three countries, Mishra said: "India, the US and Israel have
some fundamental similarities. We are all democracies,
sharing a common vision of pluralism, tolerance and
equal opportunity. Stronger India-US relations and
India-Israel relations have [therefore] a natural
logic." He then called for the establishment of a
US-Israel-India axis to fight "the menace of global
terrorism" by military means, ie "fight terror with
terror".
The proposal was warmly welcomed by
US officials and the pro-Israeli lobby. Jews and
Indian-Americans also came together in the US. Despite their
obvious differences, the alliance in the US has the
potential to increase the clout of the two communities,
which are about 5.2 million Jews and 1.8 million
Indians, but highly educated, affluent and attached to
democratic homelands facing what they increasingly view
as a common enemy.
Ed Blanche wrote
in Beirut's Daily Star on July 17, "In India, the demise of
the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party government
in parliamentary elections in May was seen as a
potentially major setback for Israel's plans for extending
its influence into the subcontinent to help
contain Pakistan's nuclear and ballistic missile programs
and into the energy-rich Muslim republics of Central Asia
in conjunction with the Americans. The BJP had become
a major buyer of Israeli arms and
counter-intelligence expertise and had forged unprecedented ties with
the Jewish state. The new government under the
Congress party, which throughout the Cold War was
staunchly pro-Arab and has said it will take a more
even-handed approach to the Middle East, is not expected to be
so pro-Israel. The new government unveiled its policy
roadmap on May 27, which said that India would remain
committed to the cause of a Palestinian homeland and
that new impetus would be given to diplomatic and
economic relations with Arab states.
"A recent
scandal in India's premier intelligence agency, the
Research and Analysis Wing, in which a senior officer
recruited by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
defected as security authorities closed in on him, has
raised fears that the US and Israeli intelligence
services have penetrated India's intelligence
establishment. Asian intelligence sources told the Daily
Star that Israel's Mossad, as well as the CIA, sought to
recruit Indian intelligence operatives attending
seminars in Israel in recent years and apparently
succeeded in some cases. All this is likely to further
damage Israel-India relations.
"US and Israeli
analysts believe that the Congress, which restored
relations with Israel in 1992, will issue some tough
statements, 'then things will settle down'. But even the
Americans are bracing for some policy shifts by the
Congress-led government in New Delhi, which relies on
the support of leftists, who oppose proximity to the US
and the occupation of Iraq, to survive. Some US
officials in Washington, along with Jewish
organizations, are deeply concerned about a rupture in
Indian-Israeli relations that were enthusiastically
supported by the Bush administration, especially the
hawks in the Pentagon, in part to help counterbalance
China, America's emerging strategic rival. There is no
expectation at this time that either Ankara or New Delhi
plan to sever relations with Israel. But it is clear
that their relationships with the Jewish state are
becoming more hard-headed, particularly because of
Israeli heavy-handedness with the Palestinians and
because of Iraq. Whether this will result in reining in
Sharon remains to be seen, but some big changes may be
in the offing," the report in the the Daily Star said.
Conclusions Erdogan's AKP it now
secure and it has sidelined the military. Even without
Turkey's EU aspirations, its strategic relationship with
Israel is declining, as it moves closer to Syria, Iraq,
Iran and other countries in the region, despite open
disapproval by the US.
But Turkey still looks at
Israel as its partner in its part of the world and,
therefore, where security and economic interests are
concerned, there will be no change for the worse.
Israeli defense analysts note that the US sees strategic
importance in Turkey joining the EU, as it regards
Turkey as a model to prove that there is no
contradiction between a Muslim state and a democratic
one.
There is now speculation about what the
competing powers and players want in Iraq (and the
region) and what might happen. Even the only superpower
cannot have things its own way, as is being proved in
Iraq every day. According to a Turkish commentator, the
US "has the unpleasant choice of alienating its
indispensable Turkish ally or its loyal partners in
Iraq, the Kurds. The Iraqi Kurds are apparently worried
of a Shi'ite-Islamist Arab domination of Iraq that would
be reminiscent of Saddam Hussein's days that deprived
them of their basic rights. Above all, they want a
chance of self-rule. The unfolding events threaten the
gains that they made during the last 13 years since the
1991 Gulf War, thanks to the American security air
umbrella from bases in Turkey. Iraqi Kurds might decide
to move closer to Turkey. Turkey, in turn, has gradually
moved to perceive the benefits of rapprochement with the
Kurds to have a say in determining the future of Iraq."
While Turkey has not recently repeated claims
on northern Iraq, as it did in before the Iraq war, it
has left no one in doubt. On June 23, Turkish
Foreign Ministry spokesman Namik Tan said regional
countries would have the right to speak on the future of
Iraq if the Iraqi people failed to reach a compromise on
the territorial integrity of Iraq and engage in civil
war. "If eventually civil war emerges in Iraq, then the
regional countries and international community will have
the right to intervene."
He added that the most
important issue for Turkey concerning Iraq was the
territorial integrity of Iraq. Wrote one Turkish
journalist: "The Iraqi Kurds have raised concerns that
the Shi'ite and Sunni Arabs can join together and take
action against them after the withdrawal of the United
States. While the Iraqi Kurds are trying to increase
their advantages despite Turkey, they should also
consider Turkey a security insurance for their own
future. Furthermore, the Iraqi Kurds admit that the only
realistic window for opening towards the West is
Turkey."
And if the US cannot enforce its will,
how can Israel hope to shape the region? Disruption and
chaos, yes. And if the US were forced to withdraw, even
with a face-saving solution with help from the
international community, it might then look for a
scapegoat. If Israel wants to play a role in creating an
independent Kurdistan, it would become a willing tool in
the regional balance, at US behest.
But such a
development would be inimical to Turkey and would not be
accepted. By now it should be clear that the
developments in Iraq will be determined by the growing
insurgency now blossoming into full-fledged resistance
for removing the US occupation and for freedom.
How the dice will roll for Iraqi Kurds is
difficult to predict. But a breakup of Iraq would have
unforeseen consequences, even beyond the region. The
struggle has only begun in earnest. With a stock of
nuclear bombs, Egypt shackled and thus neutralized,
Israel is the key player in the region - and a country
that Turkey cannot afford to ignore or alienate. But
then Israel also needs Turkey.
K
Gajendra Singh, Indian ambassador (retired),
served as ambassador to Turkey from August 1992 to April
1996. Prior to that, he served terms as ambassador to
Jordan, Romania and Senegal. He is currently chairman of
the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies. E-mail Gajendrak@hotmail.com.
(Copyright 2004 Asia
Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication policies.)
