TURKEY’S US-BACKED “WAR ON TERROR,” PART 4

“Turkey’s long term commitment to the principles of democracy and their commitment to undertaking the reforms Europe demanded before even the first round of accession negotiations – have produced economic opportunity, stable political institutions, and the peaceful rule of law [sic]. Turkey is proof that our strategy of spreading democracy in the Islamic world can work.”
~ Eric Edelman, former US Ambassador to Turkey.

The article has been reproduced, with permission, from the October 2006 electronic edition of Variant: Cross Currents in Culture, No. 27, Winter 2006 and from Chapter 5 of the book by Desmond Fernandes and Iskender Ozden (2006) US, UK, German and NATO ‘Inspired’ Psychological Warfare Operations Against The Kurdish ‘Communist’ Threat in Turkey and Northern Iraq (Apec Press, Stockholm).

The Nature of US ‘Psychological Warfare Assistance’ in the ‘War on Terror’.

In this context in which the Bush administration has agreed to jointly act to ‘hunt’ down and ‘destroy’ the ‘PKK terrorists’ and to vigorously support the Turkish state’s ‘War on Terror’, we need to recognise and confront the fact that there does not appear to be any effective public oversight into the nature of accountability of these ‘deep political’ US-Turkish ‘arrangements’ and ‘operations’.(86) Such joint ‘US-Turkish’ arrangements are of deep concern to many individuals, human rights and community based organisations and communities living in the Kurdish ‘south-east’ in particular. Key questions arise: Will US special forces continue to provide JCET ‘training’ or any other types of ‘special forces’ linked assistance to Turkey’s notorious mountain commandos? As Chalmers Johnson has noted: “Republican representative Christopher Smith, chairman of the House of Representatives Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, says: ‘Our joint exercises and training of military units – that have been charged over and over again with the gravest kind of crimes against humanity, including torture and murder – cry out for explanation’. But the US Secretary of Defence seems to be unconcerned”. (87)

There is certainly concern that the US state will, intentionally, choose to keep collaborating with Turkey’s notorious mountain commando brigades and other ‘special military/paramilitary/police forces’ that are at the forefront of the counter-insurgency struggle against the ‘PKK terrorists’, thereby providing a US-linked ‘legitimacy’ to their often murderous activities. Already in recent months, it has been announced that, “after completing a six-month intensive training course, 242 [Turkish] Special Forces personnel have been appointed to posts in the [Kurdish] east and southeast [of Turkey]. Reports say that with the newly appointed personnel, there are now 3,500 members of the Special Forces in Hakkari, Sirnak, Tunceli and Bingol”. (88) An April 2006 report in The Turkish Weekly suggests that Turkish ‘special forces’ have, indeed, been given ‘the green light’ by the US to intensify the basis of their ‘offensive psychological warfare operations’ against the ‘PKK threat’ in northern Iraq: “Reports have been confirmed that it was actions taken by Turkish troops this past Saturday which were the spark for specific complaints from Baghdad about increased Turkish military presence and action along the Northern Iraqi border. According to these reports, Turkish armed forces, using infra-red cameras, spotted PKK terrorists crossing the border near Cukurca town, after which a special force team of around 100 soldiers proceeded to cross the border into Iraqi territory. The go-ahead to send in the special forces team was reportedly given from Ankara over the weekend. Recent meetings between Turkish and US officials have indicated that the US has given the nod to Turkish action on this front”. (89)

US psychological warfare operational support to target PKK ‘leaders’ in northern Iraq – as recently as July 2005 – has been, apparently, also confirmed from a leading Turkish military source: “The Turkish army said Tuesday the United States had ordered the capture of commanders of the rebel Kurdistan Workers’ Party in Iraq … The United States ‘have issued a direct order for the capture of the leaders’ of the PKK, General Ilker Basbug, the army number two, told a group of journalists”. (90) According to a 21st April 2006 report by the Cihan News Agency, “The Turkish NTV news channel report[ed] … that the US has been providing intelligence to Turkish security forces carrying out anti-terror operations in southeast Turkey near the Iraqi border. NTV claims that the CIA and US army intelligence have tipped off the Turkish security forces during operations in which a total of 31 PKK terrorists were killed in two separate areas. ‘US satellites monitoring the Middle East screened southeast Turkey and spotted the PKK terrorists,’ the report claims, stating that the US is also tapping communications among the PKK authorities. Turkey and the USA have already been cooperating to curb the financial resources of the PKK, designated as a terror organization by the USA and EU”. (91)

According to an April 2006 Zaman.com report: “The Turkish armed forces have launched [a] … military operation along the Iraqi border where Turkish troops have concentrated for days. The Northern Iraqi cities of Amedi and Zaho, sheltering PKK militants, were hit with mortar attacks in ‘Operation Crescent’. First reports say that locations where militants were lodged in the regions of Geliye, Pisaxa, Pirbela, Sheshdara, Sheranish and Elanish were demolished. The‘Burgundy Beret’ units”, a Turkish special forces team which reportedly had been involved in the US state linked capture and illegal abduction of PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan in Kenya, “performed a reconnaissance mission in the area a while ago as part of the Special Forces Command. Troop deployment to the region from different parts of the country continues. Along with the transfer of commandos, heavy construction equipment” was “also being brought to the border for use during a possible cross-border operation”. (92)

We also know that US International Military Education Training (IMET) courses were conducted with Turkish forces in 2001, 2002 and were requested for 2003: (93) “Created by Congress in 1976, IMET grew out of the Vietnam-era Nixon Doctrine that aimed to avoid U.S. casualties by preparing ‘Asian boys to fight Asian wars’. (94) This programme has been “harshly criticized in Congress for having [previously] trained soldiers in Colombia and Indonesia who went on to commit human rights violations”.(95) We also know that the US Congress approved IMET training with Turkish forces for 2005 and President Bush requested further IMET funding for the financial year 2006. (96) It is also known that Turkey was the recipient of a US Foreign Military Financing (FMF) programme in 2005, and President Bush, again, requested further FMF for Turkey in 2006. FMF, it needs to be appreciated, “provides grants for foreign militaries to buy US weapons, services, and training … Although the majority of these funds are used to buy weapons, mobile training teams are often deployed as a facet of weapons sales packages to train the foreign country’s forces in the operation and maintenance of the weapon system(s). In other cases, aid recipients use this money to buy training for their soldiers in specific skill areas. In such cases, U.S. mobile training teams, usually made up of Special Operations Forces, are sent to the host country for up to six months”. (97)

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) have also provided ‘assistance’ to Turkish forces involved in their ‘War on Terror’: “The … FBI … is … involved in training foreign police and paramilitary forces. This training is [ostensibly] justified primarily as part of its efforts to counter drug trafficking, terrorism, and organized crime … No annual report”, however, “provides public information on FBI foreign training programs … The DEA, also part of the Justice Department, conducts international police training as well … The international police training programs of the FBI and the DEA are funded at least in part out of the annual appropriation for Justice Department operations and are, therefore, technically exempt from the Leahy Law vetting requirements (which currently cover only programs funded by the foreign aid and Defence Department appropriations)”. (98)

According to one report: “The FBI is committed to cooperating with Turkey in its fight against armed rebels of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). FBI director Robert Mueller said, ‘We are working with our counterparts elsewhere in Europe and in Turkey to address the PKK and work cooperatively, to find and cut off financing to terrorist groups, be it PKK, al-Qaeda’, or others … ‘There have been concrete results and there will continue to be concrete results around the world, in Europe and elsewhere’, he added. Mueller spoke after a day of talks with senior Turkish police and national intelligence officials, which he said served to strengthen bilateral ties and enable the two countries to cooperate in facing terrorist threats”. (99) Another report has also clarified that, “at the FBI, the Office of International Operations oversees the Legal Attaché Program operating at 46 locations around the world. The operation maintains contact with … other US federal agencies such as the CIA and military agencies such as the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), and foreign police and security officers…It coordinates its activities with all US and foreign intelligence operations. In 2000, it opened offices in Ankara, Turkey”. (100)

That the DEA and FBI are providing extensive and ongoing ‘anti- terrorist’ and ‘anti-narcotics’ assistance to the Turkish ‘secular state’, its embassies, security, military and paramilitary forces is rather ironic, given that ‘deep political’ circles in these very Turkish sectors apparently are – and have been – heavily involved in the organised crime, state terrorism and drugs trade. (101) In debating the issue of public accountability, we also need to be aware that valid concerns have been raised over the highly questionable and disturbing ways in which the FBI and DEA have been allowed to operate overseas (let alone within the United States) without adequate oversight mechanisms being put into place.(102) Writing in 1980, Henrik Kruger, for instance, detailed the way that “the White House appears to have sponsored a secret assassination programme under the cover of drug enforcement. It was continued by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), which seemingly overlapped with the CIA in political rather than drug enforcement”. (103) Kruger, again, in analysing the nature of US linked psychological warfare operations in Mexico during the 1970’s, further discovered that “a 1975 Narcotics Control Action Plan for Mexico, drafted by the DEA, CIA and State Department, opened the way for new appropriations for fighting narcotoics in Mexico through INC. Thirty helicopters as well as other aircraft and computer terminals were brought in, and extensive training programs were initiated. The notorious Operation Condor began in January 1976 with an army of DEA trained Mexican narcotics agents and their US supervisors, mobilised to fight the drug traffic in the countryside. Reports of the operation reveal that US taxpayers’ money has, in fact, been used for political extermination; that DEA helicopters are used by private landowners to attack peasant revolutionaries with rockets, small arms fire and napalm; that large groups of farmers and independent narcotics dealers have been murdered or tortured while the major narcotics families have been protected … DEA supervised killing and torture had not stopped as of 1978, when the Mexican Bar Association documented eighteen forms of torture applied by Mexican narcotics agents. Prisoners and Mexican agents alike affirmed that DEA agents not only knew of the torture, but at times were also present at the interrogations”. (104)

Confirmation that the FBI and CIA were co-ordinating their ‘anti-PKK’ initiatives with the Turkish state came in a December 2005 Hurriyet report: “Following the visit of FBI director Robert Mueller to Turkey on Saturday, CIA chief Porter Goss followed in Mueller’s footsteps and paid a visit to Ankara for talks with officials from the Turkish General Staff and the intelligence service MIT … The two visits took place soon after US Ambassador Ross Wilson announced that there were some secret aspects to the visit over cooperating in the fight against PKK. The visits have triggered speculations that the US might start a [major] serious initiative for the neutralization of PKK after the Iraqi elections. The talks between Goss and Turkish officials will focus on al Qaeda, and on developments in Iraq, Iran and Syria. The Turkish side will submit to Goss a file containing intelligence information about top-level PKK militants in Northern Iraq. Turkey will also convey to Goss its concerns about developments that might pave the way for the founding of a Kurdish state in Northern Iraq … Turkish Land Forces Commander General Yasar Buyukanit was [also] currently in the US for talks with US officials” over these matters. (105) Columnist Semih Idiz, from the Turkish Milliyet, interestingly also revealed the following information in an article dated 12th December 2005:

I checked with the US side about CIA Director Porter Gross’ visit, but they were tight-lipped. However, they underlined one point: They said that this visit wasn’t a sudden one, but the final link in a chain which began with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s visit to Ankara in February and which covers a great many high-level mutual military and civilian visits. They said that this situation was putting the lie to claims that relations were facing hard times and was moreover a concrete indication of the cooperation which is ‘gradually deepening’. As for the issues to be discussed by Gross in Ankara and Buyukanit in Washington, they are known. The Turkish side confirmed this as well. These issues can be listed as follows: the general situation in Iraq and the presence of the terrorist PKK in northern Iraq, Iraqi President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s controversial remarks that threaten instability in the region, and the Syrian issue vis-a-vis Iraq and Lebanon.

Meanwhile, new US Ambassador Ross Wilson finally came to Turkey, and President Ahmet Necdet Sezer didn’t make him wait to present his letter of credentials. This should be considered an extension of this coordination. In sum, the situation points to important developments which require the ambassador’s presence in Ankara. Otherwise, he would have come after Christmas. Certainly, these developments are first and foremost about Iraq. Meanwhile, the [specifics concerning the] future of cooperation against the PKK is still uncertain. The US side says to expect developments on this issue… The US has started to listen to Turkey considering the [PKK presence in] Iraq issue more and now perhaps the US understands this better today. (106)

A report from Winds of Change further observes that “the most interesting details of the [December 2005] meeting seem to have appeared in Cumhurriyet, which states the following”:

During his recent visit to Ankara, CIA Director Porter Goss reportedly brought three dossiers on Iran to Ankara. Goss is said to have asked for Turkey’s support for Washington’s policy against Iran’s nuclear activities, charging that Tehran had supported [PKK and other] terrorism and taken part in activities against Turkey. Goss also asked Ankara to be ready for a possible US air operation against Iran and Syria …Diplomatic sources say that Washington wants Turkey to coordinate with its Iran policies. The second dossier is about Iran’s stance on terrorism. The CIA argued that Iran was supporting terrorism, the PKK and al-Qaeda.The third had to do with Iran’s alleged stance against Ankara. (107)

“The implication here is that the US believes that it’ll be using [the Turkish] Incirlik [airbase] in any aerial operations against Iran and wants to secure Turkish cooperation on that score – the visit of Turkish Chief of Staff General Yasar Buyukanit to DC is likely related here. I would also note that the issue of Iranian support for the PKK has long been the official position of both the US and Turkish governments”. (108) The Bush administration’s need to secure Turkey’s assistance in its joint plans with the Israeli state to restructure the Middle East [in particular, in southern Lebanon (109), Syria and Iran] has probably also meant that it will, in return, have had to commit itself towards, once again, aggressively supporting the Turkish state’s ‘war against PKK terrorists’ [i.e. ‘Turkish Kurds’, as many see it], irrespective of any ethical concerns that others may have over the matter. Such aggressive military assistance will, initially, probably be provided in a more covert manner, however, as it is probably not keen to be seen to be publicly providing the ‘green light’ to both Israel and Turkey at the same time to devastate both regions that they are keen to enter into.(110) In these circumstances, the strategy will probably, for the next few weeks at least, be restricted towards provision of substantive covert US military and CIA/FBI/DEA/DIA support to Turkey’s ‘anti-terrorism forces’, even as the US will exert its influence over KDP and PUK Kurdish leaders in northern Iraq, other Iraqi politicians (111) and Israeli leadersto exert as much ‘anti-terrorist, anti-PKK support’ that they can offer to Turkey in the coming months.(112)

This may, indeed, explain why an Israeli army chief visited Turkey’s military leaders so soon after the FBI and CIA Directors’ visits to the country. It may also explain why the same Israeli army chief reportedly requested that Israeli special forces commandos could soon ‘train’ in the very mountainous areas in which Turkey’s notorious ‘anti-PKK’ mountain commandos also just so happen to be training and operating in (113), and why former Israeli commandos were also intensively training Kurdish security forces in northern Iraq who were ostensibly committed towards combating the PKK: “The CIA and FBI visits were followed by the Israelis. Israeli Army Chief Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz arrived in Turkey in a week. According to the Israeli officials the reason for the visit is to develop the dialogue and co-operation between Turkey and Israel. However the questions were similar to those of Americans. Iran, Syria and Iraq were the foremost priorities. The Israeli Army Chief further asked permission for training the Israeli commandos in Turkey’s Bolu and Hakkari mountains. Halutz said ‘our commandos cannot see snow, the weather in Israel is quite hot. If they can be trained in Turkey, they would be ready for the winter conditions’ … The problem is why Israel wants to be ready for the mountain and winter circumstances? There is no cold neighbouring country around Israel. The only places Israeli commandos could use their training are Turkey, Iran and Northern Iraq [all areas where Kurdish PKK forces also happen to coincidently be based] (114)… Three weeks ago Israeli Yedioth Aharonot reported that dozens of former Israeli commandos have [also] been training Kurdish security forces [i.e. presumably the very KDP and PUK linked forces that have committed themselves to jointly working with Turkey to target and eradicate the ‘PKK terrorist threat’] in northern Iraq, supplying them with equipment worth millions of dollars. And now the Israelis want to come to the other side of the border. The Hakkari Mountains are on Turkey-Iraq and Turkey-Iran borders and the surrounding region is sensitive Kurdish populated areas”. (115)

John Stanton’s analysis is also worth reflecting upon:

Rumsfeld and Cheney – the two crusty Nixon Administration buddies – and perhaps the most ruthless and dangerous Americans ever to hold office in the corporate/government world … and their disciples share the view that ‘conduct unbecoming’ does not exist. No law, no boundary, no moral code, no amount of lives or outdated parchments like the US Constitution and Bill of Rights will be a barrier as they push forward their foreign and domestic agenda for some of the US population, Turkey and Israel. They hide behind the veil of ‘the national security of the United States of America’ and label ‘Top Secret/Special Compartmentalized Information’ the data that would implicate them … [Concerning] Rumsfeld’s Death Star in Arlington, Virginia – the Pentagon – and [from] there into the offices of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy. Known simply as The Policy Organization, it is the former home of the notorious neo-con Douglas Feith. But that’s not the interesting part. Under organizational titles like Policy, International Security, Homeland Defense, and Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict, exist operational elements like Counternarcotics, Detainees, Combating Terrorism, Homeland Security Integration, Stability Operations and the Defence Policy Board. Its leaderships boast Kissinger and Cheney protégés, stridently pro-Israel and Turkey supporters, and a former US Phoenix Project [i.e. a death-squad US state ‘inspired’ mass murder project that was activated in Vietnam during the 1960’s] operative. And this is where the guidelines for the [current and upcoming] Wars on Terror, Drugs, and Weapons of Mass Destruction are developed and implemented in the field … The Policy Organization has no problem dealing with psychopathic killers, buying and selling drugs, dropping white phosphorous on women and children, using the global black-market to help a ‘critical’ country upgrade its nuclear capability, or selling out the American people for the sake of profit. The lives of 12 or 1.2 million human beings are inconsequential – nothing more than expendable extras in the big show. ‘Sensitive’ matters must be classified or not discussed at all.

Undersecretary of Defence Eric Edelman (Cheney’s pick) runs The Policy Organization. Not surprisingly, he’s the former Ambassador to Turkey. ‘Turkey’s long term commitment to the principles of democracy and their commitment to undertaking the reforms Europe demanded before even the first round of accession negotiations – have produced economic opportunity, stable political institutions, and the peaceful rule of law [sic]. Turkey is proof that our strategy of spreading democracy in the Islamic world can work’, said Edelman. Lofty and duplicitous words that are not to be believed … [Also, distressingly], if Turkey and Israel are [perceived by these people and deep political circles to be] so “damn” critical to the USA’s interests, then [it seems likely that] they can operate around the globe [and, by implication, in Lebanon, the Occupied Territories and south-east Turkey/north-west Kurdistan and northern Iraq/southern Kurdistan against their ‘terrorist enemies’] with impunity, protected by names like Rumsfeld, Cheney, Hastert, Scowcroft, Edelman, Bush and, once upon a time, Doug Feith. Meanwhile, [what becomes apparent is that], back in Turkey, … Turkey’s atrocious treatment of its Kurdish population and it’s threat to invade Kurdistan – now [sorely] located in Northern Iraq [as it is still not considered to ‘exist’ officially in Turkey], go [publicly] unnoticed in the US. [This, even as] Turkey has purchased 30 “Cobra-type” armoured vehicles from Otokor, a unit of Koc Holdings to bolster its [‘anti-terrorist’] fight against a growing domestic Kurdish insurgency. And the Turkish military-industrial complex has expanded by 30 percent since 2004. (116)

Given the nature of this type of US support for Turkey’s ‘War on Terror’, it seems reasonable to conclude that a ‘new intensified phase’ of ‘joint’ US-Turkey psychological warfare operations is underway. The Embassy of the US in Ankara, for instance, recently confirmed that “General Joseph W. Ralston (USAF, retired) ha[d] been appointed as Special Envoy for Countering the PKK. General Ralston will have responsibility for coordinating US engagement with the Government of Turkey and the Government of Iraq to eliminate the terrorist threat of the PKK and other terrorist groups operating in northern Iraq and across the Turkey-Iraq border. This appointment underscores the commitment of the United States to work with Turkey and Iraq to eliminate terrorism in all its forms” (117)- apart from, of course, those ‘forms’ of terrorism that are promoted by the US-Turkish-Israeli and US backed Iraqi states. Local news sources in northern Iraq (south Kurdistan), for instance, reported on 14th August 2006 that “over 100 Turkish MIT (National Intelligence Agency) agents” had been permitted to cross over into the region “together with members of the Turkish Special Forces”. (118)

These cross-border military incursions into the “US protectorate of Iraq” (119) are unlikely to have taken place without a ‘green light’ having been provided by the US government. In all of this, there does not appear to have been any adequate public oversight into the nature of these ‘approved’ incursions and US-Turkey ‘anti-terrorism’ collaborative ‘special operations’ that have taken the lives of so many ‘suspected’ PKK ‘terrorists’. On 13th September 2006, we are also informed that “after a meeting with [the] Turkish Prime Minister”, Ralston clarified that “the United States would take tangible measures on the PKK, … adding that all measures would be taken for an influential fighting … He ruled out the possibility of meeting with [the] PKK … ‘Meeting with the PKK is out of the question for me. I never meet a terrorist organization. We want to get rid of them. I am intend[ing] to meet Turkish, Iraqi and U.S. governments and thus get rid of the PKK organization’, he said … [He also] met with Turkish Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Ali Tuygan and retired General Edip Baser, who was appointed as Turkey’s anti-PKK coordinator. Ralston said that he would travel to Baghdad from Ankara for talks with Iraqi officials” (120) to take matters further.

If, as we are now informed, the Bush administration, in its wisdom, is committed to jointly ‘hunting down’ and ‘destroying’ the ‘PKK terrorists’ using the full might of its military and intelligence agencies, additional questions arise. Will there be, as many Kurdish and human rights analysts contend, a resurgence of US-Turkish state inspired ‘false flag’ operations that will blame ‘the PKK’ for massacres and disappearances of Kurdish civilians that were perpetrated by state inspired forces? Will initiatives that seek to resolve the ‘Kurdish question’ through ‘military/paramilitary means’ rather than through peaceful dialogue, be intensified even as public interest organisations, peace groups and human rights organisations oppose such measures? Will there be a resurgence of US-Turkish state ‘inspired’ anti-terrorist ‘abductions’, ‘disappearances’, massacres, and torture sessions for Kurdish civilians, intellectuals, schoolchildren, students, journalists, politicians, lawyers and other perceived ‘pro-Kurdish’ supporters in Turkey and northern Iraq (south Kurdistan)?

Other concerns also arise: In jointly targeting, tracking and ‘hunting’ down and capturing the ‘terrorists’, how will these ‘terrorists’ – ‘civilian’ and/or ‘combatants’ – be treated? Given that the PKK has officially been described by US administration staffers as being ‘no different’ to al-Qaeda, are PKK members or ‘suspected PKK’ members likely to be treated during ‘interrogation’, ‘targeting’ and ‘incarceration’ in the same way that al-Qaeda suspects or members have been treated? If so, there is certainly cause for concern. (121)

TO BE CONTINUED . . .

86. ’‘’For a detailed examination of this issue, see: Fernandes, D. (2006) ‘On The Nature of the US State’s Engagement in “Anti-Terrorist Initiatives” in Turkey and Northern Iraq: A Cause for Concern?’ Presented at the Time for Justice: The Case of Ocalan and the PKK. End the Criminalization of the Kurds in Turkey and Europe public meeting, Committee Room 20, The House of Commons, Westminster, 18th July 2006 and hosted by John Austin, MP.
87. ’‘’Johnson, C. (2000) The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, p. 72-74.
88. ’‘’The New Anatolian (2006) ‘Police Send More Special Forces to East, Southeast’, The New Anatolian, 17 August 2006 (http://www.info-turk.be/336.htm).
89. ’‘’AFP (2005) ‘Turkey Says US Ordered Arrest of PKK leaders, Threatens Incursion Into Iraq’, AFP, Ankara, 19 July 2005.
90. ’‘’AFP (2005) ‘Turkey Says US Ordered Arrest of PKK leaders, Threatens Incursion Into Iraq’, AFP, Ankara, 19 July 2005.
91. ’‘’Cihan News Agency (2006) ‘US Intelligence Aids Turkish Strikes Against PKK Terror Organization’, Cihan News Agency, April 21, 2006, as reported in Info-Turk, May 2006, No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists).
92. ’‘’Zaman.com (2006) ‘Turkish Armed Forces Strike PKK Camps in Northern Iraq’, Zaman.com, 29 April 2006, as quoted in Turk, April 2006, No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists).
93. ’‘’Foreign Policy in Focus (2002) Special Report, May 2002, Appendix 2: IMET Training And Human Rights Abuse: The Official Record (http://www.fpif.org/papers/miltrain/app2.html).
94. ’‘’Foreign Policy in Focus (2002) Special Report: Programs and Funding, May, 2002 (http://www.fpif.org/papers/miltrain/programs_body.html).
95. ’‘’Risen, C. (undated) ‘Hot for Teacher’ (http://www.flakmag.com/opinion/jcet.html).
96. ’‘’Berrigan, F. and Hartung, W. D. and Heffel, D. (2005) U.S. Military Aid and Arms Transfers Since September 11: A World Policy Institute Special Report, World Policy Institute (http://worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/wawjune2005.html#15 and http://worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/wawjune2005.html#15 ).
97. ’‘’Foreign Policy in Focus (2002) Special Report, May 2002: Programs and Funding (http://www.fpif.org/papers/miltrain/programs_body.html).
98. ’‘’Foreign Policy in Focus (2002) Special Report, May 2002: Programs and Funding (http://www.fpif.org/papers/miltrain/programs_body.html).
99. ’‘’‘FBI committed to help Turkey against Kurdish rebels’, 9 December 2005 (http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/051209170330.w0g64v73.html).
100. ’‘’Stanton, J. (2004) ‘A Fantastic Tale Turkey, Drugs, Faustian Alliances & Sibel Edmonds’, June 29, 2004 (www.dissidentvoice.org; http://www.dissidentvoice.org/June04/Stanton0629.htm).
101. ’‘’See Fernandes and Ozden, US, UK, German and NATO ‘Inspired’ Psychological Warfare Operations Against The Kurdish ‘Communist’ Threat in Turkey and Northern Iraq.
102. ’‘’See Fernandes and Ozden, US, UK, German and NATO ‘Inspired’ Psychological Warfare Operations Against The Kurdish ‘Communist’ Threat in Turkey and Northern Iraq; Blum, W. (2005) Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire. Common Courage Press, Monroe, Maine; Goddard, D. with Coleman, L. (1993) Trail of the Octopus: From Beirut to Lockerbie – Inside the DIA. Bloomsbury, London and Kruger, H. (1980) The Great Heroin Coup: Drugs, Intelligence and International Fascism. South End Press, Boston.
103. ’‘’Kruger, The Great Heroin Coup, p. 164. For further details, refer to pages 164-166.
104. ’‘’Kruger, The Great Heroin Coup, p. 179, 180.
105. ’‘’Hurriyet (2005) ‘Turkey bargains with CIA over PKK’, Hurriyet, 12 December 2005 (as reproduced in http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=10864).
106. ’‘’ Idiz, S. (2005) ‘Important Developments in Turkey-US Relations’ – A summary of his column, as quoted in: ‘Summary of the political and economic news in the Turkish press this morning, 12. December 2005 (http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/CHR/ING2005/12/05x12x12.HTM# 3).
107. ’‘’Darling, D. (2005) ‘Tidbits from Turkey on Iran’, Winds of Change, December 21, 2005 (http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/tidbits_from_turkey_on_iran-print.php).
108. ’‘’Darling, D. (2005) ‘Tidbits from Turkey on Iran’, Winds of Change, December 21, 2005 (http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/tidbits_from_turkey_on_iran-print.php). Sensing a possible attack by US backed forces and, perhaps, in an endeavour to ‘dissuade’ Turkey from joining in the US plans for an assault of some kind on Iran, it is instructive to note that there has been recent intensified co-operation between Iran and Turkey on the issue of ‘joint operations’ against the PKK and PKK-linked forces.
109. ’‘’Where Turkey has offered to contribute some ‘peacekeeping troops’, after Israel’s destruction of much of the infrastructure of the region during its recent 2006 offensive there. The US also, importantly, relies on Turkey to provide troops at key moments in its Afghanistan NATO linked ‘War on Terror’ campaign. Chossudovsky also argues that: “There is another dimension which directly relates to the war on Lebanon … Israel is slated to play a major strategic role in ‘protecting’ the Eastern Mediterranean transport and pipeline corridors out of [the Turkish linked] Ceyhan [BTC Project] … The bombing of Lebanon is part of a carefully planned and coordinated military road map. The extension of the war into Syria and Iran has already been contemplated by US and Israeli military planners. This broader military agenda is intimately related to strategic oil and oil pipelines. It is supported by the Western oil giants which control the pipeline corridors. In the context of the war on Lebanon, it seeks Israeli territorial control over the East Mediterranean coastline … Prior to the bombing of Lebanon, Israel and Turkey had announced … underwater pipeline routes, which bypassed Syria and Lebanon … On the other hand, the development of alternative land based corridors (for oil and water) through Lebanon and Syria would require Israeli-Turkish territorial control over the Eastern Mediterranean coastline through Lebanon and Syria. The implementation of a land-based corridor, as opposed to the underwater pipeline project, would require the militarisation of the East Mediterranean coastline … Is this not one of the hidden objectives of the war on Lebanon?” – Chossudovsky, M. (2006) ‘The War on Lebanon and the Battle for Oil’, 26 July 2006 (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20060726&articleId=2824).
110. ’‘’In the short term, it may also be politically inconvenient to endorse an all out Turkish invasion of northern Iraq. The US is critically dependent, for the moment, upon KDP-PUK ‘Iraqi’ Kurdish support in its ‘Iraqi Imperialist Programme’. Consequently, as long as the PUK-KDP agree to assist the Turkish state with its ‘anti-PKK’ offensive, it is likely that it will ask Turkish forces to desist from overt incursions into the area. It seems likely, though, that several cross-border covert operations will continue to be approved, even as the US may seek to encourage the Israeli state and the PUK-KDP to collaborate with each other in Turkish approved covert operations aimed at further targeting the PKK.
111. ’‘’A Xinhua News Agency September 2006 report, for instance, reports upon the following, hardly coincidental, recent ‘development’: “Visiting Iraqi Defence Minister Abd al-Qadir Muhammad al-Ubaydi called … for NATO member Turkey’s assistance in soldiers training. Speaking to reporters prior to his meeting with his Turkish counterpart Vecdi Gonul, al-Ubaydi said that ‘military training in Turkey is excellent. Thus, we want to send [our] Iraqi soldiers to Turkey for their training’. He said, ‘I am in Turkey to further develop relations between our two countries. We are aware about Turkey’s concerns arising from the [Kurdish and PKK linked] north of Iraq and Iraq in general. The Iraqi government will do all it can to eradicate [these] matters of serious concern of Turkish authorities’… The Turkish official indicated that Baghdad has taken some steps against Turkey’s outlawed PKK based in the north of Iraq and will continue to work on the issue. ‘We will inform al-Ubaydi about Turkey’s expectations and the steps that must be taken by the Iraqi government against PKK’, he added” (‘Iraq calls for Turkey’s assistance in soldiers training’, Xinhua, 8 September 2006).
112. ’‘’At this point, it should be noted that there has also been extensive past US backed Israeli state linked covert ‘anti-PKK’ support ’‘’ that has been extended to the Turkish state. See Fernandes and Ozden, US, UK, German and NATO ‘Inspired’ Psychological Warfare Operations Against The Kurdish ‘Communist’ Threat in Turkey and Northern Iraq.
113. ’‘’A 2003 Human Rights Watch study has detailed some allegations that have been levelled at the Bolu Turkish Mountain Commando Brigade: “The Bolu Commando Brigade, for example, was reportedly responsible for numerous violations of the laws of war, including village destruction, indiscriminate fire, and ‘disappearances.’ Relatives of victims of several extrajudicial executions and ‘disappearances’ in Diyarbakır province in 1993 named the Bolu Commando Brigade as the perpetrating unit. The European Court of Human Rights found Turkey guilty of violations of the right to life in two clusters of ‘disappearances’ reportedly involving Bolu commandos. One case was the ‘disappearance’ of eleven Kurdish inhabitants of the village of Alaca in Diyarbakır province in 1993 (Akdeniz and others v Turkey). The second was the ‘disappearance’ of three men from the village of Cağlayan in 1993. Relatives said that soldiers from the Bolu Commando Brigade took the men away (Orhan v Turkey). None of the perpetrators of these incidents have been brought to justice” – Human Rights Watch (2003) ‘Turkey and War in Iraq: Avoiding Past Patterns of Violation’, Human Rights Watch, Briefing Paper, March 2003 (http://hrw.org/backgrounder/eca/turkey/turkey_violations.htm).
114. ’‘’Israeli training may also be related to possible joint US-Israeli state plans for the destabilisation and/or targeting of Iran and/or Syria in coming months.
115. ’‘’Gulcan, N. (2005) ‘Targets are Iran and Syria’, Journal of Turkish Weekly, 27 December 2005 (http://www.vredessite.nl/andernieuws/2006/week02/12-27_targets.html). Training of this kind, apart from potentially being geared for offensive operations against the PKK, are also likely to have been geared towards ‘potential’ offensive operations against the Iranian and/or Syrian regime.
116. ’‘’Stanton, J. (2005) ‘Brent Scowcroft Talks Turkey; Sibel Edmonds Fights Fascism’, November 19, 2005 (http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/stanton/stanton_turkey.php).
117. ’‘’Embassy of the US, Ankara (2006) Press Releases ‘US Department of State Statement by Sean Mc Cormack, Spokesman: Special Envoy for Countering the PKK’, Press Release, Washington, DC, 28 August 2006 (http://ankara.usembassy.gov/pr_08282006.html).
118. ’‘’DozaMe.org (2006) ‘Newsdesk Report’, DozaMe.org, 14 August 2006 (http://dozame.org/blog/2006/08/14/increased-turkish-military-and-intelligence-activity-in-southern-kurdistan-and-iraq/).
119. ’‘’Jacobs, R. (2004) ‘Nukes in the US Protectorate of Iraq? Iran Looks to Its West and Says: I Don’t Think So’, Counterpunch, 22 June 2004 (http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs06222004.html). For further references to its protectorate status, see: Francis, D. (2006) ‘US bases in Iraq: a costly legacy’, Christian Science Monitor, 3 April 2006 (http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0403/p16s02-cogn.html). In it, he notes that: “Iraq, says Pike, is a US ‘protectorate’”. Also refer to the ‘University of CaliforniaSpecial Meeting of the Division of the Los Angeles Division of the Academic Senate, Korn Convocation Hall Minutes of April 14, 2003’ (http://www.senate.ucla.edu/SenateVoice/Issue4/Divison%20Minutes%204.14.03%20FINAL.doc).
120. ’‘’Xinhua (2006) News bulletin, Xinhua, 14 September 2006.
121. ’‘’See Fernandes and Ozden, US, UK, German and NATO ‘Inspired’ Psychological Warfare Operations Against The Kurdish ‘Communist’ Threat in Turkey and Northern Iraq, and Danner, M. (2004) Torture and Truth: America, Abu Ghraib, And the War On Terror. New York Review Books, New York.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: