Turkey, Iraq Deal Fails To Boost Hopes Over PKK Fight
Turkish Zaman
FATMA DISLI
Oct 1, 2007
After four days of negotiations last week, Turkey and Iraq signed a
counterterrorism deal targeting members of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party
(PKK) based in Southern Kurdistan, but despite Ankara’s efforts failed to agree
on a plan that would have let Turkish troops chase PKK across the common border.
Under the accord the two countries pledged to take all necessary measures,
including financing and intelligence, to combat the PKK and other militant
groups. However this recent deal failed to boost hopes in Turkey for an
effective fight against the PKK, which killed 12 people in Şırnak over the
weekend. The failure of a former trilateral mechanism between Turkey, the US and
Iraq in conducting effective military operations against the PKK is also an
important factor causing pessimism, along with the increasing influence of Kurds
in Iraq, who are unwilling to cooperate in the fight against the PKK.
Discussing the reasons as to why Turkey could not convince the Iraqi side to use
its right to conduct “hot pursuit” operations into Iraq, Star columnist Nasuhi
Güngör blames the regional administration in Southern Kurdistan, particularly
its head, Massoud Barzani, for excluding the right of hot pursuit from the list
of measures to be taken against the PKK. Actually he believes that signing an
agreement with the powerless and fractured Iraqi government and the promises
granted by it have no practical meaning for Turkey, pointing out that making any
moves in Iraq without the approval of the Kurds, who are very influential in the
international arena, has become nearly impossible with their rising influence.
Milliyet’s Semih İdiz acknowledges that this agreement is a positive step taken
against the PKK to a certain extent, in that it makes it binding for the Iraqi
administration to prevent the terrorist organization’s military, political and
financial activities, however he is skeptical about how the Kurds who provide
the security of their region themselves, with the consent of the Baghdad
administration, will be convinced of this. “The most important aspect of the
stumbling negotiations in Ankara last week was that they revealed the power of
Iraqi Kurds. Thus Kurds in a way said that, ‘If Ankara refuses to have us in
security negotiations, we will intervene in the negotiations from outside’,” he
comments. Referring to a recent plan approved in the US Senate to limit the
power of Iraq’s central government and give more power to its ethnically divided
regions, İdiz urges that if this non-binding resolution comes to pass, Turkey
will no longer be able to insist that it is addressee in Iraq is the central
Baghdad administration. “In brief, Turkey overlooks the fact that the new Iraq
is being formed by the Kurds and Shiites. Having such a stance bears the risks
of facing Ankara with some undesirable circumstances,” he notes. However, İdiz
still thinks that there are things that Turkey can do. “As a powerful state
Turkey can take the steps it deems necessary, despite the threats and pressure
from the international community,” he says, stressing that while taking such
steps Turkey should thoroughly examine the cost and gain of such moves in order
not to fall into situations similar to the US in Iraq and Israel in Lebanon.
Another columnist from Milliyet, Yaman Törüner, laments that Turkey is left
without an important opportunity with the exclusion of its right to conduct hot
pursuit operations in the deal signed with Iraq. “We surrendered to the US. Even
if we do not admit it, a Kurdish state has been established in Iraq. The
pressure of the Kurdish step made us take a step backwards,” he complains.
