DON'T LOSE TURKEY

In one fell swoop, the new US Congress could do more damage to US foreign relations than anything done by the current Administration in the last 5 years. The House of Representatives' resolution, to declare the massacres of 1.5 million Armenians over 80 years ago a genocide, could cripple our forces fighting two wars, fracture NATO irreparably, and tilt the balance of power in the Middle East decisively in Iran's favor; and that is just the beginning.

Since the inception of the war in Iraq, the importance of Turkey to the United States has been virtually ignored by the media, and given short-shrift by our policy-makers. Recently, the discussion of the war in Iraq and the nuclear crisis with Iran has almost completely omitted references to Turkey, except when the PKK (Kurdish Worker's Party of Turkey) and the Iraqi Kurds are discussed. This is an enormous mistake, and horribly myopic. Both, the media and the policy-makers, have taken for granted Turkey's alliance with the United states and ignored Turkish grievances. Whether Turkey's grievances are valid or not, Turkey is NATO's second-largest military power, and is as crucial to US influence in the Middle East as Israel, and maybe even more crucial.

Currently, Turkey has 140,000¹ troops on the northern border of Iraq almost as many as the entire Coalition has in Iraq. Turkey's forces are poised for a massive invasion of the Kurdish Region, and could completely unravel the brightest spot of the war. Over a year ago, in reference to a possible invasion of northern Iraq, Turkey told its military to prepare for the possibility that they may come into conflict with US troops. Meanwhile, we are in a potential military showdown with Iraq's other major neighbor, Iran. Unfortunately for us, Iranian and Turkish interests are more closely aligned than US and Turkish interests because of their common struggles to eliminate Kurdish separatists in their two countries. If the Turkish government and military come to believe that US interests are fundamentally at odds with Turkish interests, they may leave NATO and shut-down the most critical logistics hub we have for our wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Due to the Armenian genocide resolution that passed the House of Representatives' Foreign Affairs Committee last week, Turkey has recalled their ambassador to the United States back to Ankara for "consultations". The temporary recall of their ambassador is a measure of their extreme frustration, and sends a message that they are willing to cut their ties with us. Furthermore, last week Prime Minister Erdogan's foreign policy adviser stated, "I can promise you [the Turkish reaction to the passage of the House Resolution] won't be pleasant". The deaths of 1.5 million Armenians was a horrible event, and may well have been genocide. However, this is probably the worst time to put the resolution to a vote, because it jeopardizes the well-being of almost 200,000 American soldiers and civilians who rely on supplies coming through Turkey to fight two wars.

According to Secretary of Defense Gates, 70% of our air cargo and 30% of our fuel for the troops in Iraq flies through Turkey. The NATO forces in Afghanistan are probably even more reliant upon Turkey as a logistics hub, because there are no other routes to Afghanistan that are both friendly and secure. Whose airspace will we fly through to get supplies to the troops in Afghanistan? Romania and Bulgaria may be possible staging sites, but our facilities in Eastern Europe and the Balkans are probably not prepared for the level of activity going through Turkey and are likely to be much less efficient and effective. Furthermore, the routes are longer and costlier and may put more stress on our airlift capabilities overall, and on the actual aircraft themselves. Losing Turkey could cost us any possibility at a victory in Afghanistan.

If Turkey shuts down our northern logistics routes for Iraq, then the US may end up relying solely upon the Straits of Hormuz to deliver supplies to our troops in the Persian Gulf. If we come into military conflict with Iran, then the Straits of Hormuz could become an extremely insecure supply route for our war effort. Logistics is not sexy, but it is critical. Wars and entire armies are lost when the military supply-chain is shutdown. That is one of the reasons why we defeated the Iraqi Army the first time we fought them. We cannot afford to have over one-third of combat troops at risk of being surrounded by a disgruntled Iraqi population, a hostile Turkish army, a hostile Iranian army and then also be in poor-supply. Soldiers can only fight as long as they have beans and bullets. If those are lost, then we may lose the Multi-National Corps – Iraq.

This sounds like an extreme scenario, but it isn't. We are facing the very real possibility of losing a critical NATO ally, gaining a regional rival and possibly sliding into conflict with the second-largest military power in NATO. Additionally, Turkey doesn't have an ocean and a continent to cross to deliver supplies and soldiers. Turkey's departure from NATO could critically fracture that alliance, and cripple one of the most critical elements of US foreign policy.

There has only been one country that has left the military component of the NATO alliance, and that was France. However, France continued to act and cooperate as an ally and remained a political member of NATO. Due to the nature of the tensions between the US and Turkey, it is not likely that Turkey would remain in the alliance at all. An alliance member of Turkey's size withdrawing completely from NATO could significantly diminish NATO's military capabilities in terms of combat-ready manpower, and result in the loss of a logistics hub that has been critical to US and NATO influence in the Caucasus, Central Asia, and the Middle East. Without the ability to retain key alliance members and project power into areas critical to the NATO alliance, there may be less confidence in the benefits and protection that NATO claims to provide.

If Turkey were to leave NATO, and cease cooperation with the West on Middle Eastern policies, then we would have yet another, possibly hostile, rival vying for influence in areas which we consider strategically important. Turkey could counter US efforts at achieving an over-all Middle Eastern peace deal between the Israelis and the Arabs. The Turks could also become the missing piece of a hostile cordon around Iraq starting at the southern Iran/Iraq border and stopping at the Syrian/Jordanian border. Furthermore, Turkey could slowly begin to further destabilize the Balkans, the Caucasus, and Central Asia or work with Russia, Iran, and China to diminish or eliminate US influence in those regions.

If Turkish and Iranian cooperation begins to grow, then they could jointly present a fairly formidable presence within the Middle East and the surrounding regions. Turkey is already working to develop its economic links with Iran through trade and energy deals. A departure from pro-Western policies may likely jeopardize our efforts to use Turkish oil and natural gas pipelines as an alternative to Russian and Iranian routes into Central Asian energy fields. This may isolate the US and Europe from unfettered access to critical natural resources. The loss of Turkey as an ally has much greater implications than any of our policymakers or the media seem to realize.

In expressing their frustration toward US foreign policy, the Turks have a point. After Operation Desert Storm we choked off their trade with their second-largest neighbor, Iraq, and gave them very little in compensation. We have ignored their requests to crackdown on the PKK ( a terrorist organization according to our government), and we have raised the very real possibility of an independent Kurdish state on their border which fuels their fear of a Kurdish state rising from within their borders. Additionally, we have failed to influence the EU to consider Turkey's application for membership more favorably. From a Turkish point-of-view, it is understandable to feel that there is very little that the US has done for them lately. Furthermore, until now, they have continuously supported our military activities, on some level, in spite of the damage it has done to some of their critical interests. We have done nothing but exacerbate the Turks' worst fears, and pushed them much more closely into alignment with Iran.

The current Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and President Abdullah Gul both come from the Justice and Development Party, which arose from an Islamist party tradition that traces back to the Welfare Party of former prime minister Necmettin Erbakan. Developing closer ties to Iran, and other traditionally anti-American regimes in the Middle East, was one of Erbakan's principal foreign policy goals. Now, through our own short-sightedness, we are pushing Turkey toward a Middle Eastern foreign policy that we have strenuously opposed in the past, and may seriously damage our interests in the future.

If the United States can't speak with one voice on its foreign policy, and hold its most critical alliance together, we may look dangerously weak. How will our enemies and rivals react? North Korea is currently working with us, but will they continue to do so, if they believe that NATO is fracturing and that the US can't even keep its closest allies? How will this impact China's decisions about whether and when they are willing to attack Taiwan? Will this cause our current and potential allies to question whether America is still able to lead and protect them?

According to a press release, the US Ambassador to Turkey believes that, " The partnership between Turkey and the United States is strong and may remain so. We are determined to pursue our common vital interests and strengthen our shared values." Hopefully, he is right, but it almost seems delusional in the current crisis. As the situation stands now, we have over-extended our small active duty forces, and we are coming close to losing a critical ally. We need to cut a deal with Turkey and salvage our alliance right now, or we may regret it for years, and possibly decades, to come.

Tobias Anderson

The writer is a veteran of the war in Iraq.