View Full Version : Will Turkey invade Northern Iraq?
I've kept an eye on this for a while but it appears the rhetoric in Turkey is to the point now where an invasion (Im sure there are other terms to be used for it) into Iraq seems to me likely.
Turkish general: Ready for PKK strike By SELCAN HACAOGLU, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 18 minutes ago
Turkey's top general said Thursday the military was ready to stage a cross-border offensive to fight Kurdish guerrillas in Iraq and that he already had sought government approval to mount military action.
Earlier Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has pledged his support for any military decision to stage an incursion into Iraq, said the army had not yet asked parliament for permission.
But Gen. Yasar Buyukanit said he had asked for approval during a news conference on April 12, when he said "an operation into Iraq is necessary."
"We have told both Turkey and the world on April 12 that as soldiers, we are ready," Buyukanit said Thursday.
Buyukanit's remarks appeared to put Erdogan's government under pressure to seek approval from parliament to send soldiers into Iraq to fight separatist Kurdish guerrillas. The rebels have long used northern Iraq as a base in their campaign for self-rule in southeast Turkey.
The United States opposes any unilateral Turkish military action, fearing it could destabilize northern Iraq — the calmest part of the country.
Massoud Barzani, the leader of the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq, also strongly opposes a Turkish incursion and has threatened to confront Turkish soldiers if they enter northern Iraq.
Military trucks hauled more tanks and guns to the border area Thursday, local reporters said. For weeks, TV stations have broadcast images of military trucks rumbling along the remote border, and trains transferring tanks and guns to bolster an already formidable force in the area.
The U.S. State Department said Wednesday that it has seen nothing to substantiate reports of a significant movement of Turkish military forces to the border.
Buyukanit said the government needed to define the political targets of such an operation, referring to Barzani.
"Political authorities will determine the targets," Buyukanit said.
"Are we going to struggle with the PKK once we enter there or do something with Barzani too?" he said, referring to the main Kurdish separatist group.
Turkey fears Iraqi Kurds could establish a Kurdish state that would inspire the rebels and revive the fighting. Turkey also is concerned that Iraqi Kurds' efforts to incorporate the oil center of Kirkuk into their self-governing region in northern Iraq could embolden the rebels.
Buyukanit complained about what he said was a lack of help from allies in fighting the Kurds.
"It is obvious that Turkey does not receive the necessary support in its fight against terrorism," Buyukanit said at an international security conference in Istanbul.
Earlier this week, Erdogan urged the United States and Iraq to destroy PKK bases in northern Iraq. And the military has said Europe was not doing enough to limit the activities of fundraisers and other PKK sympathizers.
Past cross-border operations have yielded mixed results, with many guerrillas sheltering in hide-outs and emerging to fight again once the bulk of Turkish units withdrew from Iraq.
A government official, who insisted on anonymity because he was not authorized to address the media, said the military could set up a buffer zone in northern Iraq to block Kurdish rebels from entering Turkey.
Turkey set up such a zone along the 200-mile border in 1997 but gradually withdrew the bulk of its troops under international pressure, leaving about 1,000 inside Iraq. Those troops act as monitors, but have not pursued the rebels.
"To set up a buffer zone, Turkey needs to secure the consent of both Washington and the Iraqi Kurds," said Nihat Ali Ozcan of the Economic Policy Research Institute in Ankara. "However, the military buildup clearly puts more pressure on U.S. and Iraqi forces to do something quickly."
Turkish intelligence reports said Iraqi Kurdish groups were preparing defenses on their side of the border, apparently in case of any Turkish incursion.
The Turkish military says up to 3,800 rebels are now based in Iraq, and up to 2,300 operate inside Turkey. Turkish troops, reinforced by planes and helicopter gunships, have killed 14 PKK guerrillas in operations near the border since Monday.
The conflict has killed tens of thousands of troops since the guerrillas launched a war for autonomy in the Kurdish-dominated southeast in 1984.
Link: Turkish general: Ready for PKK strike (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070531/ap_on_re_mi_ea/turkey_northern_iraq)
An intresting dynamic, any takers ?
Marshal Murat
05-31-2007, 15:50
I think that it is the culmination of YEARS of disturbance that the Kurds have caused in SE Turkey. I think that with this would not have occurred with Saddam, and the U.S. should treat this carefully.
We should ensure that we keep Kurdish help in the region, but I think we should allow them (Turks) to stop the cross-border raids.
I don't think Turkey has another choice...
I think that it is the culmination of YEARS of disturbance that the Kurds have caused in SE Turkey. I think that with this would not have occurred with Saddam, and the U.S. should treat this carefully.
We should ensure that we keep Kurdish help in the region, but I think we should allow them (Turks) to stop the cross-border raids.
I agree with part 1, wouldnt have happened with Saddam, but on the second part I think Turkey has a legit cause for action given the data I have seen ( i concede thats limited to western press).
The Kurds seem opportunists to me, the whole business around Kirkuk strikes me as there overall goal is to step up thier own nation (I guess I dont blame them really). Turkish involvement in that process, means first Turkish involvement in Iraq, the possibilities derived from that enevitablity (assuming they do in fact invade) has a few potential positive outcomes for the U.S. (my main concern).
1. Iraqi unification
2. A new target for insurgents (Im not advocating this mind you)
3. a necessary draw down of forces in the north
there are lots of negatives too but lets be optomists for the time being.
Marshal Murat
05-31-2007, 15:58
The Turkish Answer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbYczbBlatA&mode=related&search=)
They could always call on this man to save the day.
The Turkish Answer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbYczbBlatA&mode=related&search=)
They could always call on this man to save the day.
I cant view that video at work, big brother dosent allow it :help:
Boyar Son
05-31-2007, 19:37
Maybe the U.S. could assasinate the Jannisary corp's general?
Also Iraqi insurgents could attack them, as they are also invading. Their invasion could turn alot of the insurgents against them, though I think the ones in Baghdad will stay in Baghdad.
Seamus Fermanagh
05-31-2007, 20:27
Kurdish power struggle.
For years, the PKK had represented the dominant voice for an independent Kurdish state. Now, with Kurdish Iraq staggering toward semi-autonomous status (and posssible statehood) they are being supplanted. The do, naturally, find this intolerable and would prefer to be the key voice of kurds again -- even if this comes at the expense of the destruction of the current arrangement. Their ideal goal (and the power they will generate for themselves) is more important than Kurdish autonomy by itself. Even if Kurdish Iraq becomes Kurdistan next week, they would still continue the attacks because THEY want to rule and would rather trash the place then give up that goal. Consider the examples of Hamas and Hezbollah.
The nascent Kurdish state would do well to crush these folks. Politically unpopular at present, no doubt, but long term stability gains worth the short term political cost.
As to Saddam quelling such stuff -- just who do you think was "in charge" in 1997, and letting them attack so that he could lobby for the reduction of the no-fly restrictions so that he could "re-establish order." Saddam either used those rebels for his own ends or let them snipe at turks to vent against anybody but his regime.
Lord Winter
06-01-2007, 00:02
It's all a matter of size. If they want to mount special forces operations and small scale offensives I'd say let them go. But if they want to march an army into kurdistan that would proably do more harm then good to the stabillity of the region.
lancelot
06-01-2007, 00:23
The U.S. State Department said Wednesday that it has seen nothing to substantiate reports of a significant movement of Turkish military forces to the border.
Hmmm...does anyone actually believe this rubbish?....what spy satallites not working lately?...intel departments having a few weeks off?.... :wall:
There can be no Kurdistan if you want Turkey to exist as a state.
Supporting the Kurds is a good way to destabilise the region further.
LeftEyeNine
06-01-2007, 01:36
The passive and overly silent compromising political stance did nothing but driving things worse, encouraging litter-bin dogs of yesterday bark under others' shades.
Mesud Barzani who is of Jewish origin, feels comfortable enough that "they could stir Diyarbakır in case Turkey messes with them". Israeli army trains Kurdish militants in Northern Iraq. I truly wonder how Barzani, Talabani and Israel are careful with the supplies and the training not to feed PKK, which has a lot of camps located in N. Iraq.
And those Kurds there call the Northern Iraq as "Southern Kurdistan". Sure, why not if they dare to point where they refer as the northern one ?
I've been informed that tanks and armored vehicles are being taken by railroads towards the border, and that commandos who have been allowed back to their civil lifes after their military drafts are being called back to the army. This seriously points out a preperation.
Lately, especially after the wretched bombing in Ankara, prime minister Erdoğan declared that they'd co-operate with TSK (Turkish Armed Forces) in case TSK knocks their door with a demand. General Yaşar Büyükanıt replied such declaration with saying "When political goals are set and the army is called for its operation, we do act. That's the way". This dialogue can be interpreted as "Show off yourself boldly if you are honest with what you think about N. Iraq. Don't throw us in front of everyone as if we are looking for a cause of distress. Also you obviously know we want to do something about that.".
As a footnote, a memorandum by the government, 2 days ago, has been delivered to USA about two American airplanes' intrusion into Turkish aerial area for 4 minutes, followed by the TSK 's notification to the government 4 days before the memorandum -being called as a "belating".
Boyar Son
06-01-2007, 04:57
Isreal trains Kurd militia?!?!:dizzy2:
If Turkey invade northern Iraq the Kurds will ask the U.S. for help, the U.S. will try to diplomaticaly but I'll bet Turkey will continue to attack Kurdish militia. Then, Iraq will be the most war torn place on Earth (if it isnt already).
Watchman
06-01-2007, 10:38
Seeing as how both Turkey and the US are in the NATO, that'd be a dilemma.
Side note: I know the Kurd areas in northern Iraq have oil and all, but is there any rational reason why the Turks can't just let the buggers have those eastern mountains along the Iran/Iraq border if they now so much want to have their own state there ? The Kurds live there anyway (in spite of some attempts of the Turkish military to correct the matter...), and it's not like there's anything of real value there isn't it ?
LeftEyeNine
06-01-2007, 13:08
Those buggers are feeding PKK encampments there, the real reason behind such a military operation is to eliminate PKK encampments around Mount Kandil before anything else.
If Turkey is willing to defy the international community, it can.
Nobody can do anything if Turkey mounts an attack on the PKK.
If Turkey is willing to defy the international community, it can.
Nobody can do anything if Turkey mounts an attack on the PKK.
Well no, maybe not directly but from what I am reading here and in the news this build up suggests more then going after some militia groups.
Thats an invasion force that suggests a determined amount of time in an occupying role. That might not go over well in Washington, which shouldnt concern turkey by way of the technical military operation (the U.S. wont stop them), but short and middle term it places Turkey further on the fringe of becoming full EU.
Not to mention any leverage it gained from being friendly with washington (admitadly that might not be an asset)
Zaknafien
06-01-2007, 13:51
US cant stop them, it would be completely hypocritcal since they'd be acting unilaterally in what they see as their national security intrests. sound familliar? lol
although, I daresay Turkey has a much more legitimate case for national security than the Shrub administration did.
US cant stop them, it would be completely hypocritcal since they'd be acting unilaterally in what they see as their national security intrests. sound familliar? lol
although, I daresay Turkey has a much more legitimate case for national security than the Shrub administration did.
Oh I agree Zak, to the point where if it were me i'd let them use our bases in the north as staging grounds, and politely redeploy the forces out of Iraq.
This of course servers my larger political ambition of a non intervention policy (unless its a dire need, IE WWII). I think Turkey is more then justified and I have no problem with unilateral action by any nation when under threat of continued attack.
Yep, that includes israel into palastine, afghans into pakistan, by all means I hope Turkey does make the move, they should, and it allows us to pull back. A win win for both allies, the only loser's are our former kurd hosts in the north but as callus as it might seem, I'm ready to let them gain thier independence the old fashioned way, just like we did many moons ago.
I just want to be thier france...
Zaknafien
06-01-2007, 14:12
You know I think we should let Turkey have the north, Iran have the east, and dissolve the desert east into a buffer zone or hand it over to Syria and Jordan. Iraq should cease to exist as a country really, its an artificial creation of british imperialism anyway, just like Kuwait.
Rodion Romanovich
06-01-2007, 14:13
Turkey have a lot more reason to be in Iraq than the USA had. But of course that also depends on the form of the operation. If it has character of "conquest" and/or attempt to take Iraqi oil, it would not be justified. But quick raids targetting key PKK training camps, providing decent supplies and protection for the civilians during the operation, and the armed forces then pulling out from most of the land within a year or so, would certainly be justified. Of course, the army should also maintain a strict policy of discipline and punish soldiers who rape or massacre civilians.
LeftEyeNine
06-01-2007, 18:09
Of course, the army should also maintain a strict policy of discipline and punish soldiers who rape or massacre civilians.
Rare scene -the one that you think should be taken care of. It won't be a prolonged stressful presence there after all.
Boyar Son
06-01-2007, 19:21
If Turkey is willing to defy the international community, it can.
Nobody can do anything if Turkey mounts an attack on the PKK.
Isnt that nationalism talking? (I assume that you are Turkish)
Nope, I'm not Turkish. I think that's a fact. Nobody can do anything if Turkey "invades" and deals with the PKK.
Watchman
06-01-2007, 20:58
Sure they can. Talk rudely if nothing else. Actually preventing the act is of course another thing...
Rodion Romanovich
06-01-2007, 20:59
Rare scene -the one that you think should be taken care of. It won't be a prolonged stressful presence there after all.
You would be surprised how many rapes and massacres average armies throughout history commit - "peacekeeping" UN troops as well as unprovoked invasion armies. Anyway, I should perhaps make clear, in case this was misunderstood, that the statement in the post above wasn't directed at the Turkish army and policy - whose discipline I know little details about - but was a list of general requirements I consider necessary for a war to be justified by a casus belli of the current type.
Conradus
06-01-2007, 20:59
Not that it would have that much effect, but an invasion won't bring them much closer to EU-membership.
LeftEyeNine
06-01-2007, 21:18
You outsiders will have a crystal-clear perspective about Turkey -if you're ever feeling the need to- as soon as you give up looking to Turkey only through the keyhole of EU.
This is a matter of internal security, mind you.
Rodion Romanovich
06-01-2007, 21:20
I agree with you Len. Turkey, unlike US, actually DOES have a reason to enter Iraq. I also doubt it would affect EU membership negatively since there's a solid casus belli.
LeftEyeNine
06-02-2007, 13:24
What can you say about American Enterprise Institute ? Their member scholar Michael Rubin (http://www.aei.org/scholars/filter.all,scholarID.83/scholar.asp) has very very surprisingly accurate analyses about Kurds and Turkey. I'd really recommend a read of his short publications here (http://www.aei.org/publications/view.,recNo.1,filter.all,fn.Michael,ln.Rubin,chlist.yes,id.83/pub_byauthor_list.asp) to get a better grip of the Kurdish Issue, rather than "oh they are so oppressed" point of view.
I also doubt it would affect EU membership negatively since there's a solid casus belli.
The only thing that can affect Turkey's admission is Turkey saying thanks but no thanks.
Lorenzo_H
06-02-2007, 19:04
Turkey invading Iraq? What? I havn't heard of this.
I wouldn't mind, to be honest.
CNN has "breaking news" that says thousands of Turkish troops have crossed the border.
By "Breaking News", I assume this means they have no details and are awaiting something from the wire. No link yet. Anybody on that side of the pond with details?
Edit-> some details:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/06/06/turkey.iraq.ap/index.html
CNN has "breaking news" that says thousands of Turkish troops have crossed the border.
By "Breaking News", I assume this means they have no details and are awaiting something from the wire. No link yet. Anybody on that side of the pond with details?
Edit-> some details:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/06/06/turkey.iraq.ap/index.html
Thanks Drone, i saw that too. From what I read it was a raid, not an occupation.
Stay tuned
Samurai Waki
06-06-2007, 17:12
The Turkish Military Probably did this to make PKK Rebels abandon Forts and Outposts along the border in lieu of a much large force that could cross with minimal resistance.
rotorgun
06-06-2007, 17:24
Question: Will a Turkish invasion of Kurdish Northen Iraq be percieved by the Coalition as a violation of soveriegn Iraq?
Answer: Most likeley yes.
Question: Is this a matter that should be presented to the United Nations to help resolve the issues before military action proceeds?
Answer: Yes, IMHO.
Question: Does Turkey have the military capability to win a confrontation with the Coalition?
Answer: Hmmmm......wanna roll the dice?
What a Gotterdammerung this Iraq problem has become.
Question: Will a Turkish invasion of Kurdish Northen Iraq be percieved by the Coalition as a violation of soveriegn Iraq?
Answer: Most likeley yes.
Question: Is this a matter that should be presented to the United Nations to help resolve the issues before military action proceeds?
Answer: Yes, IMHO.
Question: Does Turkey have the military capability to win a confrontation with the Coalition?
Answer: Hmmmm......wanna roll the dice?
What a Gotterdammerung this Iraq problem has become.
Interesting take because a lot of the members of the coalition are Nato members along with Turkey. Thats a big can of worms who ever fires that first shot.
The U.N. is a nice place to talk about problems and find out where everyone stands but to be blunt, bringing it to the U.N. ensures nothing gets done in the near term (see Darfur as reference).
Don Corleone
06-06-2007, 18:47
I know Turkey is just about at the end of its tether with the United States, and would probably quit NATO if they had any idea how to. But even so, I cannot imagine they would have risked an outright conflict with us. My guess is that they received at the very least the proverbial wink & nod before sending just a large expeditionary force (and from the sounds of it, that's all it is) into Kurdish Iraq.
The real wildcard here are the Kurds themselves. It goes without saying that THEY at the very least will view this as a violation of their sovereignty. The Turks apparently announced, according to this (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PJEPP80&show_article=1)article, that if they get any interference from Iraqi Kurds, they will have little patience for it and will fire on them as well. If the Iraqi Kurds don't sit on their hands, this has the potential of becoming rather nasty.
Don Corleone
06-06-2007, 18:51
And according to MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19070463/) the official line coming out of Ankara is that these reports are false. The Turkish government is claiming no such incursion was made.
rotorgun
06-07-2007, 03:35
I know Turkey is just about at the end of its tether with the United States, and would probably quit NATO if they had any idea how to. But even so, I cannot imagine they would have risked an outright conflict with us. My guess is that they received at the very least the proverbial wink & nod before sending just a large expeditionary force (and from the sounds of it, that's all it is) into Kurdish Iraq.
The real wildcard here are the Kurds themselves. It goes without saying that THEY at the very least will view this as a violation of their sovereignty. The Turks apparently announced, according to this (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PJEPP80&show_article=1)article, that if they get any interference from Iraqi Kurds, they will have little patience for it and will fire on them as well. If the Iraqi Kurds don't sit on their hands, this has the potential of becoming rather nasty.
Well spoken Don Corleone. I suppose that we should try to keep an open mind and see how things develop. I can understand Turkish fears of a Kurdish nation state on their southern border becoming an inspiration to Kurdish nationalists within Turkey. Unfortunately, I am afflicted with the same disease that infects so many of my fellow countrymen-cheering on the underdog. After so much persecution and setback, I admire the desire for self determination of the Kurds and can't fully appreciate the Turkish prejudices against them. I speak out of ignorance, and am open to hear the reasons for such feelings. If these groups are indeed only terrorists, then I can sympathize. I have my suspicions that this is well... rather dubiuos, as Turkey refused to allow the US military access to invade Northern Iraq in 2003. Were there fears that we should discover a different truth through contact with the Kurds in Turkey?
The Iraqi government should be able to make some political capital with the Kurds by showing solidarity with the alleged citizens. A show of support, even a symbolic one, could go far to gain the trust of these northern "Iraqis".
KafirChobee
06-07-2007, 22:42
From what I've seen on the news, the Kurd area is the only peaceful one in Iraq - and they hate AlQuaeda more than us. Can't allow that now, can we? Especially since they're sitting on all those oil reserves - I'm certain that doesn't enter into Turkey's thoughts of invading the territory - is only for national security. Right?
LeftEyeNine
06-08-2007, 01:48
From what I've seen on the news, the Kurd area is the only peaceful one in Iraq - and they hate AlQuaeda more than us. Can't allow that now, can we? Especially since they're sitting on all those oil reserves - I'm certain that doesn't enter into Turkey's thoughts of invading the territory - is only for national security. Right?
We, yesterday, gave 5 martyrs to a mine explosion planted by PKK.
Do you think USA's policy is universal? Why does one scrabble oil-hunt conspiracies for a country which has lost 30.000 lives to a terrorist organization fed by the so-called most peaceful area in N. Iraq and their "white daddies" ?
It's never beneficial to "own" ideas unless you "own" information. And while I'm filled up with sorrow of 5 lives faded yesterday, it just frustrates me. Nothing else.
Edit: Due to Banquo's Ghost's request, edited ad hominem part.
rotorgun
06-08-2007, 03:23
We, yesterday, gave 5 martyrs to a mine explosion planted by PKK.
Do you think USA's policy is universal? Are you so darn ignorant enough to scrabble oil-hunt conspiracies for a country which has lost 30.000 lives to a terrorist organization fed by the so-called most peaceful area in N. Iraq and their "white daddies" ?
It's never beneficial to "own" ideas unless you "own" information. And while I'm filled up with sorrow of 5 lives faded yesterday, it just frustrates me. Nothing else.
My condolences to you and your countrymen LeftEyeNine. For myself, I have never considered the fact that our countries share this in common; both countries have felt the grief of terrorist attacks. The main diference between the PKK and Al Qaeda is that the PKK only wants to see the creation of a Kurdish homeland, while Al Qaeda merely fears the westernization of Arab lands. The PKK actually may have more in common with the PLO in their aims. I still disagree with the use of violence to accomplish what could be done with patient diplomacy and passive resistance.
My prayers for the families of the victims. May God help ease their pain.
LeftEyeNine
06-08-2007, 03:29
Thank you, brother.
From what I've seen on the news, the Kurd area is the only peaceful one in Iraq - and they hate AlQuaeda more than us. Can't allow that now, can we? Especially since they're sitting on all those oil reserves - I'm certain that doesn't enter into Turkey's thoughts of invading the territory - is only for national security. Right?
While Turkey may have some plans regarding oil, they are of secondary importance.
Yes, national security is prime concern here. It is ridiculous to suggest that Turkey is concerned about oil, while PKK is constantly attacking Turkish soldiers and civilians.
KafirChobee
06-08-2007, 21:59
While Turkey may have some plans regarding oil, they are of secondary importance.
Yes, national security is prime concern here. It is ridiculous to suggest that Turkey is concerned about oil, while PKK is constantly attacking Turkish soldiers and civilians.
Right, again with the national security trumps all. It is my understanding the Turks have been eyeing those oilfields for some time. Their adversity to allowing the kurds a homeland is universally known, just as their denial for the Armenian genocide is.
Sorry, but if we allow a full blown invasion by the Turks into this region then we lose what ever creadance we (Bush) have for invading Iraq. We can toss that vestige about staying to assure unification out the window with the wmd's, etc.
Lumping all Kurds into one pool because of a few is what some here do with people of the Islam faith. Doesn't matter the nationality - just the religion.
LeftEyeNine
06-09-2007, 00:02
Right, again with the national security trumps all. It is my understanding the Turks have been eyeing those oilfields for some time. Their adversity to allowing the kurds a homeland is universally known, just as their denial for the Armenian genocide is.
Lumping all Kurds into one pool because of a few is what some here do with people of the Islam faith. Doesn't matter the nationality - just the religion.
Exceptionally lovely to see the curiosiness being complained about is what is being done in the same post. :2thumbsup:
Lumping all Kurds into one pool because of a few is what some here do with people of the Islam faith. Doesn't matter the nationality - just the religion.
Very interesting observation, especially considering on my post you quoted I used the word "PKK" and not Kurds. But you for some reason have no problems connecting this issue with Armenian Genocide, just because one of the sides is Turkey.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.