amigocabal

This week's visit to Turkey by Syrian President Bashar Al Assad is of
considerable geo-strategic significance. It has taken place in close
co-ordination with Syria's ally Iran, whose foreign minister Kamal Kharazzi
was in Damascus on the eve of the visit. And Turkey's foreign minister
Abdallah Gul is expected in Tehran tomorrow.

The three countries are intent on sending a firm message to the US about its
policy in Iraq. They are telling Washington that Iraq must remain a unitary
state and that they will strongly oppose any attempt to break it up into
three mini-states - Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite. Above all, they are warning
the US not to encourage the Kurds to seek permanent autonomy, let alone
independence.

This is the first time the major states bordering Iraq have publicly united
to check what they see as a dangerous American temptation, strongly
supported by Israel, to seek to weaken Iraq permanently by re-building it on
a federal basis without a strong centre - thereby dealing a blow to the
entire Arab system.

The region wants to conciliate Washington, not to threaten it. But they have
recognised that America's intervention in Iraq - and its declared intention
to remain there for several years - has profoundly altered the strategic
environment. Syria, Turkey and Iran believe they can help the US in
stabilising Iraq, but only if the US recognises their security interests and
concerns.

Fears about US and Israeli policy

It is now widely recognised that the US invaded and occupied Iraq not
because of the alleged danger from Saddam Hussain's weapons of mass
destruction, nor because of his gross abuses of human rights, but because a
strong and independent Iraq was seen as a threat to the western-dominated
political order in the Gulf and to Israel.

The Washington hawks who pressed for war - several of them friends and
allies of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon - made no secret of the fact
that, in their eyes, the overthrow of Saddam was only the first move in an
ambitious project to re-shape the entire Middle East.

Their hope was that once Arab nationalism, Islamic militancy and Palestinian
resistance were defeated, the Arab world could be re-made on "democratic"
lines, under a sort of US-Israeli protectorate.

The regional states are now rebelling against this geo-political fantasy,
which they see as fundamentally hostile to their interests and aspirations.
They share a profound apprehension about the future intentions of the US and
Israel.

The fate of the Palestinians under Israeli occupation is another huge factor
of uncertainty and instability, not least because of the passions it arouses
among the Arab and Muslim public.

Future of Syrian-Turkish relations

The Middle East peace process was among the subjects discussed by Assad and
his Turkish hosts, with the suggestion that Turkey might play a mediating
role between Syria and Israel. Assad recently called on the US to revive the
Syrian track of the peace process and indicated he is ready to resume
negotiations at the point at which they were broken off in 1999-2000 between
his father and then Israel prime minister, Ehud Barak.

But few observers believe Sharon is ready to return the Golan, which is the
price of a deal with Syria, or that the US, pre-occupied with Iraq, will put
much energy into promoting an Israeli-Syrian settlement.

Both Syria and Turkey have no love for the "neo-cons" now in power in
Washington. Paul Wolfowitz, US deputy defence secretary, is generally
thought to have offended Turkey by pressuring it - unsuccessfully as it
turned out - to allow American troops through its territory to attack Iraq
last March.

Syria, in turn, believes the "neo-cons" have no interest in a regional
peace, but would rather see the Syrian regime overthrown, as Richard Perle,
a leading "neo-con" and Arab hater, has advocated.

The fact that US President George Bush is only 10 months away from a
presidential election, while Sharon is facing increasing opposition at home,
only adds to the general apprehension and uncertainty.

Erdogan is, in turn, seeking to strike a balance in Turkey's relations with
Israel and the Arab states, as well as to distance himself from Sharon's
aggressive policies towards the Palestinians and Syria. Two subjects were
not raised in Ankara because they would have spoiled the cordial atmosphere.

The first concerns the Turkish province of Hatay, formerly the Syrian sanjak
of Alexandretta, which France, then the mandatory power in Syria, ceded to
Turkey on the eve of World War II. The Syrians have not forgotten or
forgiven this flagrant act of political immorality.

Euphrates water

The second issue not raised is Syria's contention that Turkey's large-scale
programme of dam-building and irrigation in south-east Anatolia is starving
it of a fair share of Euphrates water. In retaliation, Syria for many years
gave shelter to the Kurdish separatist leader Abdallah Ocalan.

War between Turkey and Syria was averted in 1998 only when Syria agreed to
expel Ocalan, who now languishes in a Turkish prison.

Today, the two neighbours have decided resolutely to put such disputes
behind them and look to their joint defences in a dangerously unsettled
world.

Patrick Seale is a commentator and author of several books on Middle East
affairs. He can be contacted at: pseale@gulfnews.com

bernardz

In article <mkKLb.1101$i4.643@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.ne t>,
pinkspider123@earthlink.com says...


I think that it would make a lot of sense to split it up. Don't know why
everyone seems to have something on the Kurds as there region is the
great success story in the region.

--
A fence is an expression of one perceived place in the world.

29th observation of Bernard

glugg2001

More because a strong, independent and democratic Iraq is a
threat to barbaric Islamic based regimes. The USA is now sticking
it to these Islamic regimes, even some of our allies, just like
they stick it to us by allowing terrorists to operate in thier
countries as long as they direct their terror outward.
Many people ask why the USA doesnt attack Saudi Arabia?
Well maybe we are since a democratic Iraq is definently
NOT in Saudi goverment interests.


Correct. And judging by their past and present interests and spirations,
they are worthy of hostility. Compare the rights and freedoms of
the USA and it's allies with these Islamic regimes and their allies.
Which countries systems are voted better by the people of the world
by way of immigration?

amigocabal

PKK is a Maoist, communist organization which has been heavily supported by
the Israeli communist Jews. No wonder you think highly of them.

amigocabal

news:<mkKLb.1101$i4.643@newsread1.news.atl.earthli nk.net>...


Murdering 50,000 Iraqis is not barbarism according to you.
How about the Israelis slaughtering 2 million Palestinians, will that do?

bernardz

In article <ddULb.1593$i4.1538@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.n et>,
pinkspider123@earthlink.net says...

Israel supports Turkey not the PKK. The PKK is not in power in Iraq.

--
Should the government be responsible for individual's stupidity?

30th observation of Bernard

amigocabal

supported by


Tell me all about it! Without the Israeli kolhoz PKK would have died the
natural death decade ago!

bernardz

In article <rSdMb.2584$q4.2101@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.n et>,
pinkspider123@earthlink.com says...


Can you show me where Israel once helped the PKK?

--
Should the government be responsible for individual's stupidity?

30th observation of Bernard