Kurdistan Observer

Three recent events caused Turkey to refocus its attention on the situation in Iraq, especially in the Kurdish north: Settlement of the tug-of-war over its planned Nov. 3 parliamentary elections; swelling support in Congress for a resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to order unilateral US military action against Iraq; and the reconvening of the Kurdish Parliament in northern Iraq.

After more than a month of wrangling, the date for Turkey’s next parliamentary election has finally been upheld. The elections will be held on Nov. 3 as planned, after attempts to postpone the poll were defeated. Before the date was confirmed, however, appropriate “judicial” steps were taken to ensure that the Islamist camp’s leading lights people like Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Necmettin Erbakan and Murat Bozlak would not be able to contest the election. Soon after these electoral “arrangements” were put in place, the issue of Iraq again reared its head.

The fact that Bush has become assured of lopsided votes in Congress that would authorize unilateral US military action against Iraq caused Ankara to refocus its attention on its southern neighbor. Fearing the uncertainties that might arise as a result of an American blitz on Iraq, Ankara has never hesitated to make public its opposition to such a step.

Turkey is still suffering from the consequences of the 1991 Gulf War, which, besides sowing the seeds of Kurdish independence in northern Iraq, cost Ankara at least $50 billion in lost trade.
Yet Turkey, whose greatest fear is the possibility of an independent Kurdish state rising on its southern border, might find itself forced to participate in an attack on Iraq if it realized that there was no alternative to war. Nonparticipation would mean that Turkey would be deprived of having a say in post-war arrangements for Iraq and the region as a whole.

Turkey’s relations with the Arab world will suffer enormously if Ankara decides to take part in that war especially if no major Arab countries (such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia) endorse such action, and if such a war fails to secure UN backing. President Ahmet Necdet Sezer’s declaration that attacking Iraq without a UN mandate will be unacceptable to Turkey should be seen in this light.

If, however, the US decides to invade Iraq alone (or with British backing), then that will put Turkey in a very delicate situation simply because Ankara needs US patronage in many foreign and economic issues.

The Heritage Foundation pointed out Turkey’s need for US support in a report published on Oct. 1. entitled Why America May Not Have to Go It Alone: The Growing Anti-Saddam Coalition. The report stresses the crucial role Turkey is expected to play in any US action against Iraq.

The report’s author, Dr. Nile Gardiner a visiting fellow in Anglo-American Security Policy in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation says “Turkey is faced with a stark choice: either support its closest NATO ally, the United States, or join many in the Arab world in denouncing military action. The former option will win out; the harsh financial realities facing Turkey, with its $16 billion loan package from the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, combined with a $5 billion military debt to the United States, make it unlikely Ankara will wish to jeopardize its relations with Washington.”

The report points out however, that Turkey most likely will not participate directly in the allied offensive against Iraq. It says Ankara will probably provide strategic and logistical backing for the US-led operation, including use of its air space and air bases.

“Turkish participation in a post-war security force should be encouraged,” Gardiner writes. “The Turkish Army has gained experience running the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, and the deployment of Muslim forces in Iraq would be advantageous for the alliance.”

One recent event that raised Turkish concerns more than any other, however, was the Oct. 4 meeting in Arbil of the Iraq Kurdish Parliament the first such meeting for six years.
It is worth noting that Ankara launched a widespread military incursion into northern Iraq ostensibly to pursue Turkish Kurd rebels of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party when the Iraq Kurdish Parliament first convened in 1992. That thrust was meant to deliver a message that Ankara would not tolerate the creation of an independent Kurdish entity in northern Iraq, and that it was prepared to use force to stop such an entity being established.

There is no doubt that Turkey was immensely relieved when the Kurdish Parliament was disrupted in 1996, and when the two major Iraqi Kurdish factions Jalal Talabani’s Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and Masoud Barzani’s Kurdistan Democratic Party subsequently began fighting each other.
Ankara is therefore extremely suspicious of the recent agreement between Talabani and Barzani to reconvene the Kurdish Parliament and declare a new constitution for northern Iraq’s Kurdish region. Turkey views this change as indicating that the Iraqi Kurds are contemplating statehood, something Ankara does not want.

So concerned was the Turkish government by these developments that an emergency meeting was convened in Ankara on the very day the Kurdish Parliament met. In that meeting, attended by President Sezer, the prime minister, the foreign minister, the army chief of staff, as well as security officials, Premier Bulent Ecevit declared that if the Kurds overstepped certain “limits,” Ankara will take “appropriate measures.” Foreign Minister Sukru Sina Gurel refused to divulge the nature of these “measures,” saying that to do so would allow the other side to conduct itself accordingly.

The Turks made it clear long ago that they would occupy northern Iraq if the Iraqi Kurds declared their independence. The objective of such an occupation would not only be to make sure that no Kurdish state is established, but also to prevent oil-rich Kirkuk from falling into Kurdish hands. The Turks assert that Kirkuk is a Turkmen city, and were particularly incensed when Kurdish leaders recently agreed to name it as their new capital. Taking control of Kirkuk which is now in Baghdad’s hands is also designed to deprive the Kurds of the region’s oil wealth. Ankara believes that a Kurdish state would not be viable without Kirkuk’s oil.

While the reconvening of the Kurdish Parliament caused apprehension in Ankara, the Turks were (temporarily, at least) relieved to hear Barzani declare that the Kurds would not pose a threat to neighboring states and were prepared to give guarantees to that effect. Turkish fears were also eased when they heard Talabani announce that the Iraqi Kurds were not seeking independence, but were working for a federal arrangement within a united Iraq. More importantly, Talabani spoke of Arbil, rather than Kirkuk being Iraq’s second capital.
And, despite the fact that the new Kurdish Parliament was made up of 100 Kurds and five Assyrians, news reports said that Turkmens might eventually make up 15 percent of MPs, a long-standing Turkish demand.

Ankara is closely watching the rapidly unfolding developments in Iraq, fearful that a war might unravel all the arrangements it had worked hard to build over the years.

Mohammad Noureddine is an expert on Turkish affairs. He wrote this commentary for The Daily Star