Page 1 of
2 Who's bluffing on the Turkish-Iraqi
border? By Sami Moubayed
The dictionary definition of "terrorist"
says: "A person, usually a member or group, who
uses or advocates terrorism," adding that it is a
"person who terrorizes or frightens others".
By all accounts, both definitions apply to
the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) that is
operating against Turkey from northern Iraq, with
approximately 3,500 insurgents, under the watchful
eye of the United States. The PKK after all "uses"
and "advocates" terrorism and it does "terrorize"
and "frighten" the people of
Turkey. The US seemingly
agrees with this terminology, and so does the
European Union. Both say that the PKK is a
"terrorist group" but are unable - or unwilling -
to lift a finger to halt its military operations
in Turkey.
Much of the world currently
seems fixated on the Turkish-Iraqi border, where
60,000 Turkish troops are mobilized on high-alert,
awaiting orders to carry out cross-border
operations into Iraqi Kurdistan. On Wednesday, the
Turkish Parliament voted in favor of a one-year
mandate for the Turkish Army to carry out strikes
to root out the PKK from Iraq. Out of 550
deputies, an impressive 526 voted for the military
adventure.
Oil prices have soared as a
result of the escalation in tension, with the
price of US crude reaching US$89 per barrel on
Thursday. Mustapha al-Sayyed, a Syrian oil
analyst, expects that if the Turks attack, "the
price of crude oil will reach no less than $120
per barrel". Gasoline went up 13 cents, to $2.17
per gallon, and heating oil futures rose 1.1 cents
to $2.31 per gallon. Dealers are afraid that if
conflict breaks out this would hit production in
oil-rich Kirkuk, affecting the parts of the world
that are preparing for winter.
More than
ever before, the Turks seem determined to carry
out a military operation, claiming that neither
the Americans nor the Iraqis have been able to put
an end to the PKK. General Hilmi Ozkok, commander
of the Turkish Army, when asked whether Turkey
planned to seek US permission before incursions
into Iraq, replied: "We cannot take a decision of
that kind based on the US. Every country is
sovereign. Every country makes its own decisions.
If the conditions change, you act by the changing
conditions."
A military attack, however,
would put both the US and Iraqi Prime Minister
Nuri al-Maliki in a tight spot. The Americans
claim that they already have their hands full in
Iraq, combating Shi'ite militias like those of
Muqtada al-Sadr, Sunni forces loyal to Saddam
Hussein, and al-Qaeda adherents. Making matters
worse, the US is not winning those battles.
Simply put, the Americans cannot, even if
they wished to, take on the PKK at this stage.
Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary,
acknowledged this, confirming that combating the
PKK is a low priority for the US because it has
"its hands full" dealing with "al-Qaeda". He
added, "There is only so much you can do at one
time," before returning the ball to the Kurdish
court by noting, "The Kurdish Regional Government
has a sizeable military component and they have
the means, we believe, to address this problem.
Hopefully they can address it by exerting their
influence over members of the PKK and that it
doesn't require military action in other parts of
Iraq."
Northern Iraq is relatively stable,
after all, and the US cannot afford to see it
ablaze like the rest of the war-torn country. The
Americans know (and so do the Turks) how difficult
it is to combat a guerrilla movement like the PKK.
The Turks have been doing it non-stop since 1984
and yet have been unable to eliminate the PKK.
This Turkish war, as everybody on both sides
knows, has cost nearly 40,000 lives. Rather than
worry about it, the US has decided to turn a blind
eye.
Apologists for the US administration
tend to follow the argument that the Americans
would love to help out, but they simply cannot.
They cite the US's historical friendship with
Turkey, and the fact that the PKK is considered a
"terrorist organization" by the Department of
State. This does not wash with at least one
Turkish daily newspaper, wich has referred
bitterly to a visit to Turkey by the US State
Department special advisor on Iraq, David
Satterfield, in April this year. Satterfield
basically confirmed that the PKK was a "terrorist
organization", and promised to crack down on its
activities and close its offices in Iraq. When
asked "how soon?", he replied, "within weeks, not
months". Either Satterfield was lying, or he had
just landed from another planet without being
briefed on how powerful the PKK was becoming in
Iraqi Kurdistan.
There are two arguments
floating in Turkey at the moment.
One says
that an immediate cross-border operation is a must
and there is no turning back for Turkey. It has to
take authoritative and decisive action to rid
itself of a terrorist menace that has been
striking within its territory and on its border
for the past 20 years. Regardless if the US
accepts it or not - and while attaching little
importance to whether the PKK is actually backed
by the US - the Turks must act. They believe that
Turkey's leaders, President Abdullah Gul and Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, have made up their
minds and it's just a matter of time before a
cross-border operation takes place; a scenario
that could lead to a variety of outcomes for Iraq
and the rest of the Arab World.
A second
argument says that Turkey should not get dragged
into the PKK trap. Supporters of this argument
claim that the PKK has been losing its power base
within Turkey ever since its former leader,
Abdullah Ocelan, was arrested in the 1990s. During
the latest elections, the ruling Justice and
Development Party (AKP) won a majority in 12 out
of 15 provinces. Even provinces with an
overwhelming Kurdish population voted for the AKP,
with approximately 70% of the vote. On a
nationwide level, the AKP scored with 47%. This
shows that ordinary Kurds - those born after the
PKK began its war against the state, are more
interested in the standard and quality of living
(which the AKP promised to provide) than in armed
revolt.
Ever since the APK came to power
nearly five years ago, it has put a lot of money
into the Kurdish-populated southern region,
building roads and bringing clean, running water
and uninterrupted electricity to villages. Modern
and affordable houses are being built by the
government, giving Kurdish youth little room to
complain.
More recently, President Gul
visited the underdeveloped south - the first such
visit by a Turkish president since Kenan Evren's
in 1990. He mingled with locals, shook their
hands, and listened to their worries, greatly
defusing tension. These projects have embarrassed
the PKK, affected their popularity, and increased
support for the APK.
If the APK continues
helping Kurdish Turks achieve a better life, a
call to arms by the PKK will fall on deaf ears.
Radicals usually get nervous when confronted by
moderates; they don't know how to deal with them.
It becomes increasingly difficult for the PKK to
justify violence when the Turkish government is
giving the Kurds nothing but incentives to appease
their disgruntled community. The PKK would rather
that the Turks go to war against them. That would
give them a free hand to pursue their leftist
agenda from the Iraqi border. It would also raise
their popularity within the
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
