Variant issue 27 www.variant.org.uk variantmag@btinternet.com back to issue list |
TURKEY’S US BACKED ‘WAR ON TERROR’: A CAUSE
FOR CONCERN? - By Desmond Fernandes1
According to Chalmers Johnson, we need to be aware that, “in 1991, Congress … passed a law … authorising something called the Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) program. This allowed the Department of Defence to send [US] special operations forces on overseas exercises with military units of other countries … The various [US] special forces … interpreted this law as an informal invitation to train foreign military forces in numerous lethal skills … Stripped of its euphemistic language”, this ‘Foreign Internal Defence’ (FID) programme “amount[ed] to little more than instruction in state terrorism”.14 Ted Galen Carpenter has revealed that, “in 1997, the US European Command’s special operations branch”, as part of this programme, “conducted joint training exercises with Turkey’s Mountain Commandos, a unit whose principal mission is to eliminate Kurdish guerrillas. That unit” had, however, in its ‘War on Terror’, actually “been responsible for atrocities against Kurdish civilians and the razing of Kurdish villages”.15 An article in Kurdistana.com describes the manner in which “the Washington Post ran a three part series titled, ‘Free of Oversight, U.S. Military Trains Foreign Troops’. It said, a little known 1991 law, Section 2011 of Title 10 of the U.S. code, ha[d] allowed the military to send special operations forces on overseas exercises on the condition that the primary purpose [wa]s to train US soldiers. It added, as a result of this law, Pentagon has established ties with over 110 countries in the world. Dana Priest, the author of the series, cited the trip of an American SEAL team to Turkey who were training the Turkish Mountain Commandos, to show the lack of concern on the part of civilian authority in this country over the misuse of US forces and their skills. According to the declassified after-action report, the purpose of a 1997 trip was noted as, ‘to foster friendships and establish a good working relationship ... to ascertain the future needs of the Turks ...’. The report goes on to say, the SEALS ‘conducted a presentation on weapons, night vision, laser designation and sniper operations. We then allowed the Turks to operate all of these systems. It was a very productive day’. It adds, ‘The Turks ... admired the physical stamina and motivation of the SEAL element. We in turn were impressed with their capabilities and incredible endurance’. “What were these incredible
capabilities of the Turkish
commandos sharpened as they were by the members of the SEAL teams that
according to the Washington Post may still be training
these Turkish soldiers? A while back, The European newspaper
ran some of their photographed work in its front page, with a warning:
pictures that will shock the world. Members of the same
Turkish Mountain Commandos had posed for camera with the decapitated
heads of the Kurdish guerrillas they had hunted in their war against
the Kurds … One has to wonder if the SEAL team was taken to the
mountains of Kurdistan to do or witness some of the beheading
of the Kurdish guerrillas … I do know [that] … to train those who
are beheading the Kurds is a crime against humanity. In
other words, by these [‘training’] acts alone, the United States [wa]s
in violation of international humanitarian law”.16
The decision to ‘train’ alongside Turkey’s
mountain commandos in 1997,
we should note, was also made two years after Human Rights Watch had
publicly disclosed that “two special Commando Brigades, Bolu and
Kayseri, [we]re heavily involved in counterinsurgency operations.
Unlike the regular Turkish Army forces, the Bolu and Kayseri [mountain
commando] units [we]re more highly trained and [we]re expected to
engage in closer contact with PKK fighters and with civilians suspected
of supporting the guerrillas. [Witness] B.G. told Human Rights Watch
that during his April 1994-May 1995 stint in the southeast, he learned
that the Bolu and Kayseri were considered by soldiers and civilians
alike to be far more abusive of the civilian population than the
regular Army. ‘Nasty behavior toward the population [wa]s encouraged in
the Bolu and Kayseri brigades’, he explained, ‘while the
Piyade (infantry) Commando tend[ed] to be kinder. The commanders
want[ed] there to be a kind of good guy - bad guy situation,
which they then use[d] to threaten the locals. They sa[id] be good
or we’ll send the Bolu after you!’ Bolu and Kayseri Commandos
were prevalent throughout the 1994 Tunceli [Dersim] campaign, during
which tens of villages were destroyed. Witnesses interviewed by Human
Rights Watch said they were able to identify Bolu and Kayseri soldiers,
and reported that they were involved in numerous violations of
the laws of war, including village destructions, indiscriminate fire,
and kidnapping civilians who were then forced into serving as porters
during Army patrols … The Bolu and Kayseri Commandos”, furthermore,
“appear to have incorporated a significant number of U.S.-designed
M-16 assault rifles and M-203 grenade launchers into their regular
arsenal … According to Reuters, 5,000 Bolu and Kayseri
commandos joined 35,000 other forces in the Tunceli campaign [See
‘Turkish Army Torches 17 Villages, Residents Say,’ Reuters,
October 5, 1994]”.17 Ward Churchill has concluded that “both US and
British pilots” were
even “assigned to provide air support to Turkish military
forces conducting a large scale counterinsurgency campaign in northern
Iraq against Kurdish guerrillas … With regard to air support missions
flown in support of the Turks, violations of the 1923 Hague Rules of
Aerial Combat, the 1949 Geneva Convention IV and Additional Protocol 1,
UNGA Res. 2444, and the 1978 Red Cross Fundamental Rules of
International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts are
apparent. In view of the non-self-governing status accorded the Kurds
by both Turkey and Iraq, violation of UNGA Res. 1514 (XV) - the 1960
Declaration of the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and
Peoples - is also at issue”.18 The US
administration and intelligence agencies were also actively involved in
facilitating the illegal capture and abduction of Abdullah Ocalan (the
Chairman of the PKK) in Kenya in 1999.19 It has also been
established that Huseyin Kocadag, Chief of the Special Forces in
Hakkari and Deputy Chief of Police in Diyarbakir, who has been
identified as “one of the most bloody enemies of the people who
organised the units of the ‘head-hunters’ in Kurdistan … was
trained at a CIA school in the US”.20 But as the Socialist Party of Kurdistan has
noted with alarm, in the post-9/11 period as much as during the period
before that, “what is clear is that Turkish politicians and the Turkish
media don’t just mean the PKK when they speak of ‘terrorists’ but
all Kurdish organisations, Kurdish associations and even the Kurds
themselves”.31 Kurdish organisations, Kurdish
associations and even the Kurds themselves and their ‘pro-Kurdish human
rights supporters’, to many within the Turkish ‘deep state’, are
the ‘terrorist parasites’ who are to be targeted in the name of
this US backed ‘War on Terror’. With US state linked
comparisons to Bin Laden and al-Qaeda that conveniently place
‘the PKK’ and its ‘supporters’ and ‘members’ at the ‘ultimate threat’
and ‘enemy’ level that can be imagined, it is evident that any and
every type of method of targeting this ‘abhorrent,
illogical other’ will now be legitimated in the US backed
‘joint hunt’ to destroy ‘the terrorists’. The following examples of
‘who’ the ‘terrorists’ are and how they are being ‘targeted’ in the US
backed ‘War on Terror’ makes for disquieting reading: Human Rights Association Chairman Yusuf Alatas
noted with concern that “some
illegal criminal organizations within the state [apparatus] acting in
the name of ‘counter-terrorism’” and the ‘War on Terror’ “are active in
Turkey. He said: ‘The Semdinli case was the last link of
this chain. We, the people are aware that the Semdinli case was not an
isolated incident … Th[e]se events should be questioned;
otherwise Turkey will not see democracy’”.40 However, when these ‘events’ were seriously
questioned and investigated by two key individuals - Sabri Uzun
(Director of the Police Security Intelligence Bureau) and Ferhat
Sarõkaya (prosecutor in the S¸emdinli bombing case) - they
were removed from their posts under highly questionable circumstances
that suggested that a major cover-up was underway.41 Their findings,
however, are worth reflecting upon: “Sabri Uzun … raised concern about
possible military involvement in the bombings in S¸emdinli when
he was questioned by a parliamentary commission. He indicated in coded but
quite clear terms that the [Semdinli] explosion had
possibly been the work of people within the security forces, and
expressed doubt that the gendarmes indicted for the bookshop
attack could have been in S¸emdinli without the knowledge of
higher ranking officials, as claimed. Within a month, Sabri Uzun
was removed from his post … [Prosecutor] Sarõkaya, issued an
indictment in which he … suggested that a motive for the original
killing may have been ‘[t]o bring the local [Kurdish] population to a
state where it can be lured with ease into action … then
exaggerating this threat beyond its true level” in the ‘War on Terror’,
“in order to prepare the way for violent measures by the state” to be
undertaken against them “and to permit emergency rule to” once again -
as during the genocidal period of the 1990’s – “take precedence over
the administrative system in the region, … permitting security chaos in
the region to be used to apply pressure on the political authority, and
thereby … to frustrate Turkey’s fundamental political [democratising]
directions … and to protect the power and place of the core
political/ bureaucratic governing elite’. The indictment also
referred by name to a general who had reportedly described one of the
alleged [military] perpetrators as ‘a good offõcer’. On March
20, the Office of the Chief of General Staff issued a statement that
the indictment was ‘political … aiming to undermine the Turkish Armed
Forces and the fight [i.e. ‘war’] against terror’, and made a complaint
against the prosecutor. By April 21, the High Council of Judges and
Prosecutors”, in seeking to smooth the path and objectives of the US
backed ‘War on Terror’, “had taken Prosecutor Sarõkaya off the
case, removed him from his job, and stripped him of his status as a
lawyer for ‘abuse of his duty and exceeding his authority’”.42 I want to give
some examples from the Turkish newspaper Radikal´s
news from the 9th of June this year (2003), which shows the current
situation:
- Because of a calendar with the month written in English, Turkish and Kurdish, the publishers were put on trial for separatism and terror. - A group of students from Nigde university are on trial with the same accusations, because they watched Kurdish television and listened to Kurdish music.49 In the US backed ‘war’ against ‘PKK
terrorists’, it has become apparent
that “one line of reasoning” currently used “in Turkish legal practice
is”, indeed, “guilt by association. One example:
Even today, for instance, as Turkey is engaged in the EU ‘accession process’, “programmes in Kurdish for children on radio or TV” remain “prohibited”.58 An August 2005 BIA News Centre report described the following restrictions that were in place: “Local media groups who seek [to] broadcast programs in languages and dialects other than Turkish” - i.e. Kurdish - “… will [need to] present … an affidavit” clarifying their intentions and behaviour, “stating that they will not broadcast … programmes with the aim of teaching that language”.59 To merely peacefully and non-violently protest against the state’s ongoing genocidal policies, or to advocate the basic cultural right of Kurds (who represent between 20-25% of the population in Turkey, according to a number of sources) to be educated in their ‘mother tongue’ is to, therefore, in the eyes of the Turkish state, act in support of ‘PKK terrorism’. It is instructive to note that an Associated Press article confirmed in 2000 that “the all-powerful (Turkish) army still regards [merely] speaking Kurdish as a sign of Kurdish nationalism and a threat to state unity”60 - i.e. a ‘terrorist threat’ that needs to be ‘acted upon’. To add to this, “another problem frequently seen in the prosecutors’ indictments is the failure to distinguish between the non violent expression of political views, and cases of manifest violence or incitement to violence. For example, a charge of ‘aiding and abetting an illegal organisation’” – i.e. a ‘terrorist organisation’ – “does not need to be supported by concrete evidence of any linkage with the organisation. A third case in point is the use of taboo words” that might lead one to being considered ‘a terrorist’ or ‘supportive of terrorism’. “Some of the prominent taboo words are: • “‘Kurdish people’, or worse, ‘the Kurdish people’, or even worse ‘the Kurdish nation’ or [the geographical term] ‘Kurdistan’ (being seen as encouragement to ‘separatism’ or ‘incitement to hatred’); • “‘Turks and Kurds’, or worse ‘the Turkish and Kurdish people’ (suggesting that they are two distinct peoples); • “‘Mr’ Ocalan (the combination of these two words constituting ‘aid and assistance to an illegal organisation’; in 2003 there were 58 sentences on this basis)”.61 We also need to be aware of a wider destructive plan around which the US backed Turkish state’s ‘War on Terror’ is taking place: In September 2002, the Socialist Party of Kurdistan (PSK) drew attention to a “Secret Plan of Action”, masterminded by members of the Turkish ‘deep state’. According to the PSK: “The main aim of this plan is to make Kurdistan Kurd-free, to eradicate the Kurdish language and culture and thereby dispose of the Kurdish question. Dam projects which will flood historical towns of Kurdistan, flood the fertile agricultural land of the region and flood the valleys of incomparable natural beauty are part of this plan”.62 Whilst a local Kurdish, national and international initiative aimed at halting one such dam in the area - Ilisu - succeeded in halting one consortium from proceeding with the project in 2002, another consortium seems to have taken its place and been supported by the Turkish government. Despite substantive local Kurdish and national/international opposition to the project, the Turkish prime minister, on August 5th 2006, provocatively laid the foundational stone for this vast dam, thereby furthering the aims - consciously or otherwise - of this ‘Secret Plan of Action’. Maggie Ronayne’s findings are worth reflecting upon at this point: “The US-led war against the world is not only waged by military means … but [also] by development projects”, amongst other means.63 (Indeed, as is the case in the Kurdish south-east of Turkey, such ‘development’ projects are not only ‘unsustainable’ in nature, they also integrally form part of the Turkish state’s genocidal ‘counter-insurgency’ strategy for the region).64 “These very profitable projects [can] displace large numbers of people and have devastating cultural and environmental impacts … The GAP development project [in south-eastern Turkey, which includes Ilisu amongst several other dams in its portfolio], in which US and European companies and governments (and it seems Israeli companies also) are involved is a prime example of all this65 … The action of the Prime Minister” in laying the foundational stone of the Ilisu dam “appears designed to put pressure on the affected [Kurdish] communities and on European governments … The project … would flood over 300 square kilometres in the Kurdish region, … displacing up to 78,000 [primarily Kurdish] villagers. Local people would receive little or no benefit from the project. On the contrary, impacts of the dam would include more severe poverty, health problems, break-up of families and communities, environmental pollution … and wide-ranging cultural destruction … As an archaeologist, I have investigated the new updated [consortium’s] Environmental Impact Assessment, and in a review drawn up in consultation with affected women villagers and the international grassroots women’s network, Global Women’s Strike, I have shown that it is no basis for any [meaningful] project. It is not really [even] an assessment at all … My review shows how the dam [actually] threatens to destroy thousands of years of culture and heritage and its survival into the future - first of all by targeting women and all in their care. It highlights women’s opposition to cultural destruction [of this kind] by dams and war … Targeting women like this threatens the cultural destruction of the entire community. [Proposed] ethnographic and ethno-archaeological proposals to ‘salvage’ this culture are demeaning to the rural [primarily Kurdish] communities concerned, according to this review, and cannot possibly save culture … Indeed, the very area where [the] Prime Minister … laid the foundation stone has not been surveyed at all, and it is therefore a breach of international law, including European Union directives, to proceed with any construction in the absence of archaeological survey and testing … Moreover, work I’ve done over several years has indicated to me that graves, including mass graves of Kurdish people who were ‘disappeared’ during the fighting” – i.e. the Turkish state’s ‘War on Terror’ during the 1990’s – “may well lie in the reservoir area. But restrictions” intentionally “imposed by the state” during its current US backed ‘War on Terror’ “make it impossible to investigate the graves professionally and independently. In an open letter to the Turkish Prime Minister, I ask: ‘How can you proceed with the [Ilisu] dam while all these cultural impacts remain uninvestigated, and when professional opinion thinks that it is not possible to do so? In particular, it is not possible to investigate the impacts while you are prosecuting a war in the Kurdish region. Will not you and the other funders and backers of the dam be jointly guilty of [also] covering up evidence of crimes committed in that war” - which many hold to be ‘genocidal’ in scope and nature - “and guilty of involvement in further serious cultural destruction? … When the last consortium tried to build the Ilisu Dam, the World Archaeological Congress said that to go ahead would amount to ‘ethnic cleansing’. There is no reason to change that opinion today”.66
“What, then, should the Kurds do to prove” to the ‘deep state’ and to the Turkish security forces waging their US-UK backed ‘War on Terror’ “that they do not harbour the [‘terrorist’] intention to rip off the chunks of land east of the Taurus mountains? All Kurdish ‘organisations operating abroad have to omit the word Kurdistan from their names’; the news broadcast on the satellite [arts, culture and politics] channel Medya TV from Belgian exile has to ‘refrain from referring to our [i.e. the security forces’] Southeast and East Anatolian areas as the Kurdish provinces in items broadcast in Turkish and the two dialects of Kurdish’; the same TV channel has to stop ‘showing exclusively the meteorological situation of our above mentioned areas in its weather forecast’; the ‘[exiled] Kurdish National Congress has to be disbanded’; projects as devious as ‘an institute of Kurdish philology, ... a Kurdish encyclopaedia and a Kurdish economic congress have to be abandoned’; and finally, ‘no support should be given to Armenian and Syriac groups campaigning against Turkey on an international level [on issues relating to an acknowledgement of the Armenian, Assyrian or Pontic Greek genocides, for instance], and all members of the terrorist organisation have to lay down their arms and surrender to the security forces’. Anything short of that is, the tone of the statement implies, a casus belli”.76 One in which they will be ‘hunted down’ and appropriately targeted … Kerim Yildiz (Executive Director of the Kurdish
Human Rights Project)
and Mark Muller (as barrister and Vice President of the UK Bar Human
Rights Committee), in 2005, observed - with concern - that Turkey was,
indeed, refusing “even to concede that the armed conflict in the
[Kurdish] South-east is symptomatic of the broader issue of
her subjugation of the Kurds, defining the situation purely in
terms of security and/or terrorism and refusing to
become involved in bilateral negotiations with the Kurds”77
On 25th August 2006, for
example, “Turkish officials … dismissed” yet another “offer from the
terrorist PKK … for a … conditional cease-fire … The PKK’s second in
command, Murat Karayilan, proposed a … conditional cease-fire to the
Turkish government, saying, ‘We are ready to observe a cease-fire on
September 1st, coinciding with World Peace Day, and opt for a peaceful
and democratic settlement to the Kurdish issue in Turkey’. He requested
Turkey put forward a ‘political project’ that will meet their demands …
Karayilan also made a similar offer last June, saying, ‘We appeal
to the Turkish government, asking it to end military
operations in order to open the path for dialogue, and
we are ready, on our side, to declare a cease-fire’”.78
“Kongra-Gel” had also “appealed its armed
forces to take a [unilateral] decision of ‘No Action’ between
20th August and 20th September 2005”.79 Mustafa Karahan,
the head of DEHAP - the pro-Kurdish Democratic People’s Party - in
Diyarbakir, described the way in which his party was even being
restricted in its dialogue with the press, let alone the ‘deep state’:
“The pressure faced by DEHAP is very obvious. When we want to say
something to the press, our members get arrested. Many members of DEHAP
are now arrested and in prison”.80 According to
Mizgin, writing in June 2006, “neither [Prime Minister] Erdogan nor
anyone else in government will bother to speak [directly even] to [the
legal pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party] DTP.
The state … never bothered to avail itself of PKK ceasefires and calls
for negotiation. It never bothered to improve the situation
during the last ceasefire. It offered a joke for an amnesty in
2003, which meant that it wasn’t serious then either”.81
The Turkish state, during all this time, has continued to refuse to
negotiate with any ‘terrorists’. 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. 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
2006.96 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 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 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
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 We also need to ask ourselves whether
the Bush administration
will keep accepting the ‘definition’ of ‘PKK terrorists’ and
‘terrorism’ that will have been provided to it by its ‘deep political’
Turkish hypernationalist and military/paramilitary/‘special forces’
linked ‘allies’. Certainly, Condoleezza Rice, during her most recent
visit to Turkey, did not publicly express any concern over
such definitions when she provided assurances that the Bush
administration was fully supportive of Turkey’s ‘War on Terror’. The
Bush administration appears to be ‘minded’ to accept the absurd and
dangerous ‘definitions’ that are being provided and used under
the new Turkish ‘Anti-Terrorism Law’ and by Turkish military officials
to criminalise people and organisations. These definitions,
specifically created to facilitate the ‘War on Terror’, have the
capacity to criminalise the non-violent activities of many Kurdish and
non-Kurdish people. Concerns over this matter were even recently
expressed by the UN
Special Rapporteur: “[A] letter, sent on May 21 [2006] to the
Parliament Justice Committee by Martin Scheinin, UN Special Rapporteur
on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms while Countering Terrorism, informed Turkey that the new
[proposed anti-terrorism] law fails to meet the requirement of
proportionality in the use of force by security forces, introduces
‘improper restrictions on freedom of expression’ and reflects the
danger of punishing civilians not involved in violence. ‘This
danger is exacerbated by the very broad definition of terrorism’” that
is being used “‘and the very long and wide list of terrorist offences’
… Scheinin’s letter assessed the draft” - which is now law -“according
to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and also
with reference to certain provisions of the European Convention on
Human Rights. He said the very definition of ‘terrorism’ and
‘terrorist offences’ in the draft were contrary to the spirit of his
comments and recommendations after his country visit to Turkey on
16-23 February 2006 as UN Special Rapporteur, adding that ‘such
indiscriminate use of the terms terrorism and terrorist”, raised
concerns about, “ the principle of legality”,122 as well as
other issues. This new ‘Anti-Terrorism’ law, as the Bush
administration well knows,
has also been criticised from several other quarters for dangerously
enabling ‘deep political’ circles in Turkey to potentially target and
criminalise anyone they do not like as a ‘terrorist’.
Ayhan Bilgen, the Deputy Chairman of MAZLUMDER, for example, forcefully
argues that “we need to see from today that this [law] will
target every section of the society. In the past, they said only
leftists would be put on trial under Article 312, that the State
Security Courts would be involved in the struggle against separatism.
But none of these happened. They should not think they
can get away with it, saying that it will specifically effect [only]
religious groups, the PKK and left-wing organisations … This
framework” suggested by the draft bill - which is now law in Turkey -
is such that, in “using human rights advocacy, you will be”
targeted and defined as a terrorist, for “‘defending terror or
something else [like that]’, and because of this, it will incriminate”
even those who are “defending human rights, allow[ing] for the[ir]
conviction” as terrorists. Human Rights Association Chairman
Yusuf Alatas has “argued that the bill [is] ‘incompatible with human
rights’ and said it [is] intended to bring back all of the
country's past suppression laws and create a silent society … He said,
‘Not even Parliamentarians are free. Everyone standing up against the
law will be accused of supporting terrorism and standing up against the
regime’”.123 Disappearances under
detention could be revived: “The law
severely restricts the right to defence. Personal safety is endangered
with the republic prosecutor being authorised to order for a suspect not
to be allowed to contact relatives or receive the assistance of an
attorney as of the moment of detention. This situation raises
concern that ‘disappearance under detention’ incidents could be
revived”.
Those thinking differently cannot express their opinion, (or) organise: “It is known that the whole of the society does not think in the same way on issues such as the ‘Armenian Genocide, Cyprus Question, [the] Kurdish Problem’ which are the red points of the state. The law totally abolishes the right of persons, intellectuals and institutions that think differently [on these issues] to share their views with the public. Any individual who expresses their opinion, organises according to their opinion, can be put on trial for a terrorism offence under this law”.125 In reflecting upon the current
situation, it is also worth
noting that the Bush administration has set in place a series of
arrangements that are aimed at securing immunity from prosecution of
all US, Turkish and Israeli forces who may be charged with ‘war crimes’
or ‘genocidal crimes’ for any questionable actions that they may have
been found to be undertaking. The US government, it seems, has not only
been seeking to unethically provide immunity from prosecution to its
government, military forces and citizens at the International Criminal
Court (ICC), but also those of its ‘client’ and ‘favoured’ states -
Israel and Turkey in particular: “Senior (US) officials have
stated repeatedly and quite categorically that they will continue to
reject any jurisdictional arrangement allowing international
prosecution of its own civilian authorities or military personnel for
war crimes as ‘an infringement upon US national sovereignty’ (thereby
recapitulating the previously noted premise of the Third Reich).
Objections have also been raised with regard to any curtailment of
self-assigned US prerogatives to shield its clients - usually referred
to as ‘friends’ - from prosecution for crimes committed under its
sponsorship - e.g. … Turkish officials presiding over the ongoing
‘pacification’ of Kurdistan”.131 POSTSCRIPT Since this article was written, other
reports and assessments
have, similarly, concluded that there is certainly cause for concern
over the nature of Turkey’s US backed ‘War on Terror’. Outgoing
Ambassador Hansjoerg Kretschmer, head of the European Commission’s
Delegation to Turkey, conceded on 23rd September 2006 that
the behaviour of the Turkish military and security forces - the very
forces that the US-UK governments aggressively support and
collaborate with in their ‘joint’ War on Terror - was
disturbing: He sharply criticised “security organs for having ‘played
their own games outside the control of the civilian authorities, disrespecting
the legal and institutional order … In a democracy the ultimate
decision rests with … the people, which must have power to
define this service. It is they who decide which kind of state
they want to have, which role the state should play and how much money
they wish to pay for security. In other words, the state is at the
service of the people. It is not an end in itself … [But] they [the
military] consider themselves the guardian of the fundamental
tenets of the Turkish Republic and express their views on all
almost every aspect of public life which they consider
relevant from the perspective of a very wide concept of national
security. Education, religious instructions, cultural rights,
university issues, just to mention a few … These expressions of [their]
views have’”, he noted, “‘of course more weight than the legitimate
expression of the views of individual citizens … Opening his
remarks about the Semdinli case, Kretschmer described the incident … as
the ‘tip of an iceberg, as indicated by the subsequent
confession of a retired general’. He was referring to Lt. Gen. Altay
Tokat's statements in which he indicated that he had ordered the
bombing of state property while on active duty in the [Kurdish]
Southeast in the 90’s” in order to further heighten tensions and
advance the agendas of the ‘deep state’ and military.134 Turkey’s Police
General Directorate has launched an investigation into
academics at the Police Academy who contributed to the 2005
‘Security Sector and Democratic Oversight’ Almanac published by the
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV). The
investigation comes just days after the ‘Turkey Almanac 2005’, jointly
published by TESEV and the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of
Armed Forces (DCAF), was harshly criticized by the Chief of General
Staff Gen. Yasar Buyukanit in his October 3rd [2006]
landmark speech at the War Academy as being “part of the attrition
campaign against the armed forces” … A police statement in the wake of
his remarks said the Academy had launched an investigation into its
lecturers … Previously describing Buyukanit’s remarks on the Almanac as
“unfortunate”, TESEV’s Volkan Aytar told Bianet in an exclusive
interview that the investigation now mounted against its contributors
was [of] concern: “The opening of an investigation against scientists
that have shown the courage and written on an issue such as security
which was untouchable breaks one’s hopes. It also raises concerns
on academic freedoms. There are a minority of experts who work in
the field of security in Turkey” … Aytar argues that rather than react
to the Almanac, people should be proud [that] such a work was produced.
One of the writers of the Almanac, … Umit Kardas, describes the situation as “an attempt to put pressure on the [right of] freedom of expression and academic freedom”. Kardas says the academics involved should defend their freedoms and refuse to be censored. “But other academics should also act and provide them with support …By creating psychological pressure on this issue, preventing academics [from being] involved in such work, they are trying to set an example so there won’t be [any future] such work”, Kardas sa[id]. “… They want lecturers of the Police Academy to see themselves not as academics but as policemen [of a certain kind] and censor themselves … What is essential is the monitoring by people of the whole of the security sector from private security to security media. The armed forces are not used to this [democratic need] and because of that, it raises their hair”. Kardas believes that the Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) does not want to be debated [or subject to critical assessment, even as it prosecutes its ‘War on Terror’] and wants to [retain its] ‘I am protecting the order, the regime and state is my responsibility’ image.140 Turkish police
have detained 114 suspects including journalists and
radio workers in what has turned out to be a counter-terrorism
operation that involves not only the organization it targets, but a
number of legitimate unions that were recently involved in industrial
disputes, a women’s rights association, a leftwing newspaper and a
popular liberal radio station based in Istanbul.
Turkey’s Human Rights Association (IHD) reflected on the “concerning developments” taking place throughout the country and in a joint statement made with representatives of other rights groups has said “the practices enforced are worrying. Raids and detentions are seen by us as obstacles placed in front of the forces of democracy”. According to a report issued by Ozgur Radyo [Free Radio] that was searched by 30 policemen extensively last week after entries and exits to its street were placed under control, a total of 14 people have so far been arrested as part of the operation in the cities of Izmir, Ankara, Adana, Sivas, Mugla and Manisa, where they have been sent to prison. While 82 suspects are still believed to be held in detention across the country, 31 of the suspects including Ozgur Radyo’s news editor Halil Dinc and radio executive Sinan Gercek were detained in metropolitan Istanbul. The radio’s Broadcast Coordinator Fusun Erdogan had been previously detained and placed under arrest. She is being kept at Gebze prison where she has refused to give any statement on [the] grounds that she has not been informed of any charges levelled against her. Ozgur Radyo and a leftwing newspaper are the worst to suffer from the recent roundup. At core of the operation is the underground Marxist Leninist Communist Party (MLKP) which was formed in 1994 as a unification of two leftist groups known as the Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist Leninist Movement (TKP/ML Hareketi) and the Communist Workers Movement of Turkey (TKIH). The operation follows a recent hack and takeover of the organization’s web site by a group of extreme nationalist hackers. Targeted in the operation in addition to the radio, though, is what some experts regard as a substitute to an organizational voice, the Atilim (Leap) newspaper, also known as the voice of the Socialist Platform of the Oppressed (ESP). Banned for 15 days from print with a previous court order, Atilim said in its English language report online that its Chief Editor, Chief Coordinator and writers “were among … [those] imprisoned recently” in reference to the initial roundup. It claimed the banning order was taken due to its “reporting on the recent detentions and imprisonments” ... During last week’s raids in Istanbul, other places subject to search were the central and Kartal offices of Atilim newspaper as well as Gunes Agency where its technical work is carried out, the Socialist Platform of the Oppressed (ESP) building itself and the Gulsuyu Art and Life Magazine premises. What has come as most worrying for Turkish human rights groups were the new search warrants enforced late last week on a number of establishments, including the offices of leading Turkish unions. Police teams not only conducted searches in the offices of Ozgur Radyo and Atilim, but also entered and searched the Labour Women’s Association, the Science Education Aesthetic Culture Research Foundation (BEKSAV), Dockyard Ship Building-Repairs Workers Union (Limter-Is) and Tekstil-Sen’s offices … A number of documents and communications were seized alongside computers used in the radio station. The searches, it was reported, were conducted alongside a representative of the Istanbul Chamber of Commerce as well as officials from the Security Branch and Financial Branch of the police. Before the week was wrapped up and as concern over the operation mounted, the IHD Istanbul Branch hosted a press conference on September 22nd [2006] with the participation of other rights groups and representatives of the establishments subject to police search. Arguing that with the passing of the recent amendments to Turkey’s controversial Anti-Terror Law pressure on the democratic society had increased dramatically, the groups expressed concern and anxiety that the recent operation was part of the restrictions imposed on democratic forces. International PEN Turkey Centre representative Ragip Zarakolu, Democratic Society Party (DTP) Provincial Chairman Dogan Erbas, Socialist Democracy Pary (SDP) and Party of Labor (EMEP) provincial organization representatives were among those present of support IHD’s public concerns.142 Human Rights
Foundation of Turkey (TIHV) Chairman Yavuz Onen has said
that the September 12th 1980 military coup [mentality and
system of repression] was still intact in Turkey but [was now] renewing
itself and using sophisticated methods [to pursue its aims]. A most
recent example of which could be seen in Monday’s mass circulation
Turkish daily … in an article … that accused, on behalf of
officials, relatives of Turkish soldiers killed in action in the
Southeast for reacting to the deaths, and branded their verbal
frustration as an instrument of terror.
Onen said the so-called “democracy with muscle” [that was] created after the 1980 coup era had, in today’s Turkey, “declared seeking [cultural, political and human] rights an offence and made it illegal”. He said “it create[d] a situation where it appears as if the state of Turkey cannot be in harmony with international values on human rights”. Referring to [the aforementioned] report in [the mass circulation daily] that referred to anti-war protests [of this kind] as being part of a terror plot against Turkey, Onen said: “This news report regards being against war as an act of terror and related to terror organizations. I do not believe it is the product only of [the named journalist’s] pen or a ‘deep conversation’. This is the result of a psychological operation that has been planned since September 12th. This operation is a strategy to make all democratic leaps - the ‘act’ of using ‘democratic rights’ - an offence”.145 It is widely known
that the Turkish military …
used Lockheed Martin F-16’s to assist with the obliteration of Kurdish
villages in North Kurdistan during the 1990’s Dirty War, with the facts
well-documented by human rights groups. In 1995, Human Right Watch
documented arms sales to Turkey, along with related violations of the
laws of war by that state. Included among the many gross abuses that
Turkey … perpetrated against the Kurdish people, the F-16 fighter jet
figure[d] prominently …148
Kevin McKiernan [also] recorded it for us, back in 1999: … In a report ordered by Congress, the State Department admitted that the abuses included the use of US Cobra helicopters, armored personnel carriers, and F-16 fighter bombers. In some instances, critics say, entire Kurdish villages were obliterated from the air.149 With this in
mind, you should ask
yourself what, exactly, General Ralston is coordinating. We all know
the real deal, don’t we? We all know who have been the targets of those
F-16’s in Turkish-occupied Kurdistan.151
It looks like
Lockheed Martin is going to
guarantee the failure of the PKK ceasefire, from the Dallas-Fort
Worth Star-Telegram:
The Pentagon has
notified Congress it plans to allow Turkey
[within the context of its ‘defence’ needs] to buy 30 [more] F-16
fighter jets and related equipment, a $2.9 billion deal that
would provide new work for Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co.’s Fort Worth
assembly plant.153
An official of the Turkish Air Force, which already flies some 200 older model F-16’s, said recently that the country was looking to buy new F-16’s as replacements for even older planes in its arsenal. Congress has 15 days to object to the sale. If it does not, the deal can be consummated without further consultation.154 Joe Stout, Lockheed spokesman said in a prepared statement that the company was pleased with the announcement by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency. “Turkey has been a valued customer for the F-16 and other Lockheed Martin products for many years, and we are delighted to have the opportunity to continue that relationship”, Stout said. The reason I
know that Lockheed Martin will guarantee the
failure of the [PKK] ceasefire, even before it began, can be explained
in three little words: Conflict of Interest. You see,
Lockheed Martin has an insider on its board of directors, and that
insider is none other than the new US PKK coordinator, Joseph Ralston,
also of The Cohen Group155 … The conflict of interest becomes more obscene by the fact
that both Joseph Ralston and Lockheed Martin are closely tied to the
Turkish lobby organization, the American Turkish Council (ATC).156
Joseph Ralston is a member of the 2006 ATC Advisory Board, while a
former Lockheed Martin executive, George Perlman, is a member of the
2006 ATC Officers and Board of Directors. Lockheed Martin Corporation
is a Golden Horn member of the ATC, as is General Electric Company,
Boeing Corporation, Raytheon, and BAE Systems, all of which stand to
profit from the current sale. This conflict of interest makes it clear
that neither the US nor Turkey has the intention of finding a just and
peaceful solution to the great opportunity the PKK ceasefire affords
them. On the contrary, both countries seek a return to the
Dirty War, in order to reap the profits of repression.157
Israeli advisers are
helping train US special forces in
aggressive counter-insurgency operations in Iraq, including the use
of assassination squads against guerrilla leaders, US intelligence
and military sources said yesterday. The Israeli Defence Force (IDF)
has sent urban warfare specialists to Fort Bragg in North Carolina, the
home of US special forces, and according to two sources, Israeli
military ‘consultants’ have also visited Iraq.
US forces in Iraq’s Sunni triangle have already begun to use tactics that echo Israeli operations in the occupied territories, sealing off centres of resistance with razor wire and razing buildings from where attacks have been launched against US troops. But the secret war in Iraq is about to get much tougher, in the hope of suppressing the Ba’athist-led insurgency ahead of next November’s presidential elections. US special forces teams are already behind the lines inside Syria attempting to kill foreign jihadists before they cross the border, and a group focused on the “neutralisation” of guerrilla leaders is being set up, according to sources familiar with the operations. “This is basically an assassination programme. That is what is being conceptualised here. This is a hunter-killer team”, said a former senior US intelligence official, who added that he feared the new tactics and enhanced cooperation with Israel would only inflame a volatile situation in the Middle East. “It is bonkers, insane. Here we are – we’re already being compared to Sharon in the Arab world, and we’ve just confirmed it by bringing in the Israelis and setting up assassination teams”. “They are being trained by Israelis in Fort Bragg”, a well-informed intelligence source in Washington said. “Some Israelis went to Iraq as well, not to do training, but for providing consultations”. The consultants’ visit to Iraq was confirmed by another US source who was in contact with American officials there. The Pentagon did not return calls seeking comment, but a military planner, Brigadier General Michael Vane, mentioned the cooperation with Israel in a letter to Army magazine in July about the Iraq counter-insurgency campaign. “We recently travelled to Israel to glean lessons learned from their counterterrorist operations in urban areas”, wrote General Vane, deputy chief of staff at the army’s training and doctrine command. An Israeli official said the IDF regularly shared its experience in the West Bank and Gaza with the US armed forces, but said he could not comment about cooperation in Iraq. “When we do activities, the US military attaches in Tel Aviv are interested. I assume it’s the same as the British. That’s the way allies work. The special forces come to our people and say, do debrief on an operation we have done”, the official said. “Does it affect Iraq? It’s not in our interest or the American interest to go into that …”190 ‘Last week a
mass arrest campaign began against left reviews [i.e.
publications] in Istanbul. The editors of the reviews Atilim
and Sanat ve Hayat … as well of The Free Radio were
arrested, their offices were searched by special police teams. The Art
and Culture Institution Beksav, too, was subjected to similar
searches. The new Anti-Terror Law is used not against the
terrorists but against freedom of expression. Last week, two
Kurdish reviews, Ozgur Halk and Genç Bakis had
the same fate.
<>‘Beksav made a press conference [to mark the] 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide last year. Sanat ve Hayat review published three booklets as free supplements about Armenian literature and the genocide. ‘We are calling the attention of human rights [campaigners] and writers and publisher organisations to this misuse of the Anti-Terror Law against freedom of expression. The President of Turkey sent this law to the Constitutional Court, saying that this new law is against freedom of expression. These police operations, carried out in spite of the opposition of the President of The Republic, mean giving an opportunity to the government and the military to finish the opposition press in Turkey before the high court cancels this law. We are in need of urgent reaction of democratic world public opinion’”.196 - Desmond Fernandes, 10th October Desmond Fernandes and Iskender Ozden’s book, US, UK, German and NATO ‘Inspired’ Psychological Warfare Operations Against The Kurdish ‘Communist’ Threat in Turkey and Northern Iraq, will be released in December 2006. It is published by Apec Press (Stockholm, Sweden) and can be obtained in the UK from Housmans Bookshop (5 Caledonian Road, Kings Cross, London N1 9DX. Tel: 020 7837 4473). Notes 1 Desmond
Fernandes is the author of The Kurdish Genocide in Turkey
(2007, Apec Press, Stockholm, forthcoming), Colonial Genocides in
Turkey, Kenya and Goa (2006, Apec Press, Stockholm, forthcoming)
and co-author of US, UK, German and NATO ‘Inspired’ Psychological
Warfare Operations Against The Kurdish ‘Communist’ Threat in Turkey and
Northern Iraq (2006, Apec Press, Stockholm). He has written a
number of articles on genocide, Turkish state terror, tourism and the
‘Kurdish Question’, and was a Senior Lecturer in Human Geography at De
Montfort University, Bedford (1994-2006). This article is dedicated to
Iskender Ozden, Musa Anter, Ismail Besikci, Anthony Tingle, Ray
Sibbald, E. Francis, Florence, Yasser Salihee and Ayse Nur Zarakolu. 2 For a
detailed insight into the whole ‘genocide’ issue, and the applicability
of the term to the Kurdish situation in Turkey (using definitions
provided by the United Nations’ 1948 Genocide Convention and other
bodies and academics), refer to: Fernandes, D. (1998) ‘The Kurdish
Genocide in Turkey, 1924-98’, Armenian Forum, Vol. 1 (4), p.
56-107; Fernandes, D. (2001) ‘Postscriptum: A Propos De La “Petite
Question” Du Genocide Kurde En Turquie, 1924-2001’, L’Appel du
Kurdistan, Number 28, October 2001, p. 45-60; Fernandes, D. (2006) Colonial
Genocides in Turkey, Kenya and Goa (Apec Press, Stockholm) and
Fernandes, D. (2007) The Kurdish Genocide in Turkey. Apec
Press, Stockholm. 3 Chomsky,
N. (2000) A New Generation Draws The Line: Kosovo, East Timor and
the Standards of the West. Verso, London and New York, p. 12-14. 4 The PKK
has not only been criminalised by the US and Turkish governments. Under
the UK Terrorism Act 2000, provisions have resulted in the
‘proscription’ of the PKK. Under the Act, for instance, it is now an
offence to belong - or profess to belong - to the PKK, to invite
support for it, to arrange a meeting that is to be addressed by a
member of it, or to address a meeting to encourage support for it (This
is even if the meeting is being held privately, with only three people
attending). The penalty is up to ten years imprisonment. “It is also an
offence to wear any clothes or any other article which might arouse
‘reasonable suspicion’ that the wearer is a member or supporter of a
proscribed organisation. The penalty is up to six months imprisonment
and a fine of up to £5,000” (The Campaign Against Racism and
Fascism [2001] ‘The Terrorism Act - embracing tyranny’, CARF No.
62, June/July 2001-http://www.carf.demon.co.uk/feat51.html). Under such
criteria, it is now possible to ‘officially’ criminalise asylum seekers
and refugees who even wear ‘traditional Kurdish costumes’, on
the grounds that the colours of the clothes worn may ‘arouse
suspicion’ that they are ‘nationalist PKK sympathisers’. The PKK can no
longer “fundraise or organise meetings, not even to discuss why it
shouldn’t be banned. In fact, under clauses 13-(1) (a) and (b),
anyone” - be they a Kurdish refugee or not - “wearing a T-shirt” in the
UK “that carries images or symbols supporting the PKK is liable to six
months in prison” (Thomas, M. [2001] ‘The Terrorism Act is so Vague
that Jesus Christ Himself would class as a Terrorist. Churchgoers,
Watch Out!’, New Statesman, 23rd April 2001). The
Campaign Against Racism and Fascism (CARF) further warns that “the
Act’s provisions are drawn so widely as to give police and prosecutors
freedom to arrest most people who are involved in any way in refugee
communities’ activities or in solidarity work” (The Campaign Against
Racism and Fascism [2001] ‘The Terrorism Act - embracing tyranny’, CARF
No. 62, June/July 2001 -
http://www.carf.demon.co.uk/feat51.html). For Kurdish refugees and
asylum seekers - as with anyone else in the UK, be they academics or
playwrights – “writing an article or speaking in support of … Kurdish
self-determination could be construed as inviting support for a
proscribed organisation. A rally or meeting” in any public venue -
be it in a Kurdish refugee/community centre or a hotel reception hall -
which is “in support of asylum rights (but) which is addressed by a
member of one of the organisations” which has been proscribed (e.g. The
PKK) “could land the organisers in prison … The battery of new powers,
new offences and proscribed organisations allows refugee communities to
be even more closely controlled and monitored, and the criminalisation
of the refugee communities has been formalised … The Act will allow the
government to extradite ‘political offenders’ to their home state -
something which was not permitted a century ago, when it was accepted
that those fighting oppression abroad should be allowed a safe haven in
Britain. Anyone convicted of an offence under the Act” is likely to be
targeted, criminalised and “excluded from refugee status in Britain as
a terrorist supporter, and could face deportation on national security
grounds, since … the Court of Appeal accepted the Home Secretary’s
argument that a threat to a friendly government abroad was a threat to
Britain’s national security” (The Campaign Against Racism and
Fascism [2001] ‘The Terrorism Act - embracing tyranny’, CARF No.
62, June/July 2001 - http://www.carf.demon.co.uk/feat51.html).
Turkey is ‘a friendly government abroad’ that is a fellow member of
NATO. “Amnesty International” clarifies that it “has in the past
expressed deep concern over the introduction of draconian
anti-terrorism laws” not only in Turkey but “in other jurisdictions. Not
least among these has been legislation introduced in the UK, including
the Terrorism Act 2000 and, most recently, the Terrorism Act 2006
introduced at the end of March 2006” – See: Amnesty International
(2006) ‘AI against the draft revisions to the Law to Fight Terrorism’,
Info-Turk, June 2006, No. 334 (http://www.info-turk.be/334.htm#IHD_).
The Peace in Kurdistan Campaign and the Campaign Against Criminalising
Communities (CAMPACC) have also noted that “Britain has banned
Kongra-Gel as an organisation that ‘glorifies terrorism’. The move was
announced on 17 July [2006] by Home Secretary John Reid under the new
law outlawing the ‘glorification of terrorism’. It marks a further
escalation of attempts to criminalise and silence the Kurds. Anyone
expressing support for the group or [even] simply wearing clothes
implying support will be committing an offence … The UK
action follows similar moves taken earlier this year by both
the European Union and the US. Thus, whether living inside or outside
Turkey, Kurds are now facing ‘anti-terror’ laws used to deter, suppress
and criminalise political activities … The ban ignores Kongra-Gel’s
aims and activities since it was founded on 15 November 2003.
Kongra-Gel’s main objective is the attainment of ‘peace, democracy,
freedom, equality and justice for a solution to the Kurdish Question’
and the promotion of a ‘democratic and ecological society’ through
peaceful and political struggle” (The Peace in Kurdistan Campaign and
Campaign Against Criminalising Communities [2006] ‘Petition: End the
Criminalisation of the Kurds - No to UK Ban on Kongra-Gel’, The Peace
in Kurdistan Campaign and CAMPACC). 5 Hakki
Hayri (2001) ‘A Foot in Australia, Three Souls in Kurdistan: Interviews
with Ayce Akturk, Hakki Hayri and Ahmed Tigran’, in Fire, Snow and
Honey - Voices from Kurdistan, edited by Gina Lennox. Halstead
Press, New South Wales, Australia. p. 485. 6 Hakki
Hayri (2001) ‘A Foot in Australia, Three Souls in Kurdistan’, p. 485. 7 Ganser,
G. (2005) NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in
Western Europe, Frank Cass, London and New York, p. 234-235. 8 The
Turkish Daily News (13th July 1994 edition) reported
that “Karadayi, Commander of the Turkish land forces [who was to become
Turkey's Chief of Staff] was officially invited to receive the US
Legion of Merit medal at a ceremony held at the Pentagon”. 9 Colonel
George S. Patton III described his troops in Vietnam as “‘a bloody good
bunch of killers’. Patton went on to reflect upon how he considered
their ‘present ratio of 90% killing and 10% pacification just about
right’. Celebrating Christmas 1968 with a card displaying the
photo of a dismembered Vietnamese over the legend ‘Peace on Earth’,
Patton returned to the US carrying a polished human skull, complete
with a bullet hole over the left eye, presented at his farewell
party by adoring subordinates” - Churchill, W. (2003) ‘“To Judge
Them By The Standards Of Their Time”: America’s Indian Fighters, the
Laws of War and the Question of the International Order’, in Perversions
of Justice: Indigenous Peoples and Anglo American Law. City
Lights, San Franscisco, p. 326, 327. For further details about General
Alvarez, refer to Fernandes, D. and Ozden, I. (2006) US, UK, German
and NATO ‘Inspired’ Psychological Warfare Operations Against The
Kurdish ‘Communist’ Threat in Turkey and Northern Iraq. Apec Press,
Stockholm. 10
McKiernan, K. (1999) ‘Turkey's War On The Kurds’, The Atomic
Scientists, Vol. 55, No. 2, March/April 1999 (http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/1999/ma99/ma99mckiernan.html). 11
Hartung, W. (1995) Arms Trade Resource Center Reports - Weapons at
War. A World Policy Institute Issue Brief (http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/wawrep.html#weapons). 12
Pilger, J. (2002) ‘The “secret” war which has seen a 300 per cent
increase in bombing raids on Iraq’, 20 December 2002
(http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=354). 13 Deere,
J. (2000) ‘A License to kill Kurds’, Antiwar.com, 28 August
2000 (http://www.antiwar.com/orig/deere1.html). 14
Johnson, C. (2000) The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, p.
72-74. 15 Carpenter,
T. G. (1999) ‘U.S. Policy toward Turkey: A Study in Double Standards’, The
HR-Net Forum, January 1999 (http://www.hri.org/forum/intpol/carpenter.html).
Carpenter cites the following as his source: Dana Priest, ‘Free of
Oversight, U.S. Military Trains Foreign Troops’, Washington Post,
July 12, 1998, p. A1. See also: Human Rights Watch Arms Project (1995) Weapons
Transfers and Violations of the Laws of War in Turkey. New York,
Human Rights Watch, and ‘Turkey and the Charge of Genocide - A
Submission to the Independent Commission for International War Crimes
Tribunal’, Fashion Institute of Technology, New York, July 31, 1999 (as
reproduced in: http://www.kurdistanica.com/english/humright/articles/hum-article-01.html). 16
‘Turkey and the Charge of Genocide - A Submission to the Independent
Commission for International War Crimes Tribunal’, Fashion Institute of
Technology, New York, July 31, 1999 (as reproduced in: http://www.kurdistanica.com/english/humright/articles/hum-article-01.html). 17 Human
Rights Watch Arms Project, Weapons Transfers and Violations of the
Laws of War in Turkey. 18
Churchill, W. (2003) ‘A Government of Laws?’, in On The Justice of
Roosting Chickens: Reflections On The Consequences of US Imperial
Arrogance and Criminality. AK Press, Oakland and Edinburgh, p.
209-210. 19 Refer
to Fernandes and Ozden, US, UK, German and NATO ‘Inspired’
Psychological Warfare Operations Against The Kurdish ‘Communist’ Threat
in Turkey and Northern Iraq and Clark, W. ‘Byzantine
Politics: The abduction and trial of Abdullah Ocalan’, Variant:
Cross Currents in Culture, No. 8 (http://www.variant.org.uk/8texts/William_Clark.html).
20
Devrimci Sol (1997) ‘Who Are Guilty?’, Devrimci Sol, January
1997, p. 31. 21 Human
Rights Watch Arms Project, Weapons Transfers and Violations of the
Laws of War in Turkey, p. 4. 22
Article 19 (1997) Letter to the Secretary General, The Council of
Europe, dated 8th September 1997, p. 1. 23 UK
Parliamentary Human Rights Group (1994) The Kurdish Region in
Turkey: The Most Destructive Conflict in the Northern Hemisphere.
Kurdistan Solidarity Committee/Kurdistan Information Centre, London, p.
10. 24 UK
Parliamentary Human Rights Group (1993) A Desolation Called Peace:
Report by the Parliamentary Human Rights Group On A Mission To Turkish
Kurdistan, 12-17 October 1993. Kurdish Information Centre, London,
November 1993, p. 28. 25 As
quoted in Fernandes, D. (1996) Beyond the Paradise of Infinite
Colours: Turkish State Terror, Tourism and the Kurdish Question. R&B
Bookshop, Bangalore, India. 26
Schulter, M. (1999) ‘Genocide against Kurds and Ocalan Trial’, 30 May
1999 (http://www.kurdistan.org/Trial/schulter.html). 27
Campbell, M. (2006) ‘Messages of Solidarity for Mark Thomas
Demonstration’, 22 June 2006 (http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:tsv0xk-eXcwJ:www.campacc.org.uk/Library/msgs_of_solidarity_220606.doc+%22glorification%22+Kurds&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=2&ie=UTF-8).
For a detailed analysis of the genocidal context of this targeting,
see: Fernandes, The Kurdish Genocide in Turkey and Fernandes, Colonial
Genocides in Turkey, Kenya and Goa. 28 As
interviewed by Temel Demirer in ‘Impression’, Kurdistan Report,
No. 25, p. 11. 29 Ozgur
Gundem (2005) ‘US threatens Kurds’, Ozgur Gundem, 12 September
2005. 30 Keen,
D. (2006) Endless War? Hidden Functions of the ‘War on Terror’’.
Pluto, London and Ann Arbor, p. 8. 31 PSK
(2001) ‘If You Listen to Turkish Politicians...’, PSK Bulletin,
2001. 32 BIA
News Center (2004) ‘IHD: Who Is Responsible for Perincek's Death?’, BIA
News Center, 17 June 2004, as reproduced in InfoTurk, No.
310, June 2004. 33 BIA
News Center (2004) ‘IHD: S. Perincek was Executed Without Trial’, BIA
News Center, 8 June 2004, as reproduced in InfoTurk, No.
310, June 2004. 34
Boland, V. (2004) ‘A Group of Turkish Academics, Writers and Artists’, Financial
Times, 4 December 2004. 35 Peace
in Kurdistan (2006) ‘Time for Justice: The Case of Ocalan and the PKK -
End the Criminalization of the Kurds in Turkey and Europe: Notification
of a Meeting at Committee Room 20, House of Commons,
Westminster, Tuesday, 18 July, 7pm’, Peace in Kurdistan
Campaign, London, p. 1. 36
Turkish Daily News (2006) ‘New Army Chief
Buyukanõt Promises To Crush “Terrorism”’, Turkish
Daily News, 26 August 2006
(http://www.info-turk.be/336.htm#Army). 37 Zaman,
A. (2005) ‘Top Turkish Party Backs Bomb Probe - AKP’, Los Angeles
Times, November 17, 2005. 38 Zaman,
A. (2005) ‘Top Turkish Party Backs Bomb Probe - AKP’, Los Angeles
Times, November 17, 2005. 39 Guler,
S. (2005) DIHA News Agency Report, 15 November 2005. 40 Cihan
News Agency (2006) ‘Reminder of Kurdish Language from EP Member’, Cihan
News Agency, Van, 6 August 2006 (zaman.com). 41 See
Human Rights Watch (2006) Letter to Turkish Prime Minister, dated 7th
June 2006. 42 Human
Rights Watch (2006) Letter to Turkish Prime Minister, dated 7th
June 2006. 43 Xinhua
(2006) News bulletin, Xinhua, 14 September 2006. 44
Dozame.org (2006) ‘Turkish Revenge Brigades’ claims responsibility for
the bomb attack in Amed (Diyarbakir)’, Dozame.org (http://www.dozame.org/blog/index.php). 45
Dozame.org (2006) ‘Turkish Revenge Brigades’ claims responsibility for
the bomb attack in Amed (Diyarbakir)’, Dozame.org (http://www.dozame.org/blog/index.php). 46
Korkut, T. (2006) ‘Security forces authorized: “Bury Where You Kill”’, BIA
News Center, 18 April 2006, as reproduced in Info-Turk, May
2006, No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists). 47
Korkut, T. (2006) ‘Security forces authorized: “Bury Where You Kill”’,
BIA News Center, April 18, 2006, as reproduced in Info-Turk,
May 2006, No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists). 48
Korkut, T. (2006) ‘Security forces authorized: “Bury Where You Kill”’,
BIA News Center, April 18, 2006, as reproduced in Info-Turk,
May 2006, No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists). 49
Kizilocak, H. (2003) ‘The Relationship Between Turkey, EU And The
Kurds’, Paper at the International Conference on Kurds, the
European Union and Turkey, London, Sunday, 29 June 2003. 50
Hurriyet (2002) ‘27 Children Brought Before Diyarbakir’s State Security
Court’, Hürriyet, 11 June 2002, as reproduced by IMK
Weekly Information Service, 17 June - 28 June 2002, No. 160 (http://www.kurds.dk/english/2000/news107.html).
51 Aram
(2002) Conspiracy and Crisis: Turkey and the Kurdish Question: From
the Nineties to the Present Day - Written by a collective of
journalists and researchers on behalf of Aram Publisher. Aram,
Istanbul, January, 2002 (http://www.zmag.org/content/ForeignPolicy/aram0122.cfm). 52
Evrensel - TIHV, (2004) ‘Members of a Music Group on Trial in
Diyarbakir’, 6 April 2004, as cited in Info Turk, April 2004,
No. 308 53
Yildiz, K. and Muller, M. (2005) ‘Turkey, Kurds, Europe and the EU
Accession Process: “What is to be done?”’, in Muller, M., Brigham, C.,
Westrheim, K. and Yildiz, K. (eds.) EU Turkey Civic Commission:
International Conference on Turkey, the Kurds and the EU, European
Parliament, Brussels, 22-23 November 2004 – Conference Papers. KHRP,
GB, p. 97. 54 Rud,
J. (2005) ‘Turkey’s Implementation of European Human Rights Standards -
Legislation and Practice’, in Muller, M., Brigham, C., Westrheim, K.
and Yildiz, K. (eds.) EU Turkey Civic Commission: International
Conference on Turkey, the Kurds and the EU, European Parliament,
Brussels, 22-23 November 2004 - Conference Papers, KHRP, GB, p. 65. 55 Rud,
J. (2005) ‘Turkey’s Implementation of European Human Rights Standards –
Legislation and Practice’, p. 57. 56
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2002) ‘Linguistic Human Rights in Education and
Turkey - Some International Comparisons’, An invited plenary paper
at the International Conference on Kurds, the European Union and
Turkey, Copenhagen, Denmark, 14th October 2002.
57
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2005) ‘Endangered Linguistic and Cultural
Diversities and Endangered Biodiversity - The Role of Educational
Linguistic Human Rights in Diversity Maintenance’, Conference on
Cultural Diversity and Linguistic Diversity, Diyarbakir/Amed,
20-25 March 2005. 58 Rud,
J. (2005) ‘Turkey’s Implementation of European Human Rights Standards -
Legislation and Practice’, p. 65. 59 BIA
News Centre (2005) ‘Ten local TVs queued for Kurdish broadcast’, BIA
News Centre, 25 August 2005. 60 See: Associated Press (2000) ‘Kurdish students struggle with
Turkish language’, March 16, 2000, as cited in Info-Turk, March
2000, No. 259. 61 Rud,
J. (2005) ‘Turkey’s Implementation of European Human Rights Standards –
Legislation and Practice’, p. 57. 62
Socialist Party of Kurdistan - PSK (2002) ‘Report of the Socialist
Party of Kurdistan On the Relationship Between the EU and Turkey And
the EU-Accession of Turkey’, PSK, September 2002. 63
Ronayne also mentions ‘globalisation’. Source: Ronayne, M. (2006)
‘Invest in Caring, Not Killing: Women’s Opposition to Dams and War’, Ulkede
Ozgur Gundem, 29 July 2006 (http://www.globalwomenstrike.net/Turkish/WomensOppositionToDams.htm). 64 For a
detailed examination of this issue, see Fernandes, The Kurdish
Genocide in Turkey (forthcoming); Fernandes, D. (2006) Colonial
Genocides in Turkey, Kenya and Goa and Fernandes and Ozden, US,
UK, German and NATO Inspired Psychological Warfare Operations Against
the ‘Kurdish Communist Threat’ in Turkey and Northern Iraq. 65
Ronayne, M. (2006) ‘Invest in Caring, Not Killing: Women’s Opposition
to Dams and War’, Ulkede Ozgur Gundem, 29 July 2006 (http://www.globalwomenstrike.net/Turkish/WomensOppositionToDams.htm). 66
Ronayne, M. and Ascherson, N. (2006) ‘Opposition to Turkey’s Ilisu Dam
rises again: Turkey has revived plans for the vast Ilisu Dam. Maggie
Ronayne explains why she’s still fighting construction on cultural and
environmental grounds, while Neal Ascherson outlines the bitter
dispute’, 1 September 2006 (http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/336-Opposition-to-Turkey-s). 67
Yedinci Gundem (2002) ‘Kurdish Tuition as Grounds for Torture’, Yedinci
Gundem, 12 May 2002, as reproduced in IMK Weekly Information
Service, 13 May - 24 May 2002, No. 156 (http://www.kurds.dk/english/2000/news102.html). 68 IMK
Weekly Information Service (2002) ‘11 Teachers Detained’, IMK
Weekly Information Service, 13 May - 24 May 2002, No. 156 (http://www.kurds.dk/english/2000/news102.html). 69 Rud,
J. (2005) ‘Turkey’s Implementation of European Human Rights Standards -
Legislation and Practice’, p. 64. 70 As
quoted by Wilgenburg, V. V. (2006) ‘Belgium seeks clarification on
Turkish death squad operation’, KurdishMedia.com, 6 March 2006 (http://www.kurdmedia.com/articles.asp?id=11572). 71
Wilgenburg, V. V. (2006) ‘Belgium seeks clarification on Turkish death
squad operation’, KurdishMedia.com, 6 March 2006 (http://www.kurdmedia.com/articles.asp?id=11572). 72 BIA
News Center (2006) ‘Stopping Kerincsiz Ultranationalist
Attacks Is Bar’s Duty’, BIA News Center, 10 July 2006, as
reproduced in Info Turk, No. 335, July 2006, (http://www.info-turk.be/335.htm#The).
73
Wilgenburg, V. V. (2006) ‘Amed attack: Kurds and Turks face bleak
future’, KurdishMedia.com, 14 September 2006 (http://www.kurdmedia.com/articles.asp?id=13232). 74 Human
Rights Watch (2006) ‘Reuters Alerts, Turkey: Anti-Terror Law Used
Against Peaceful Activists’, Human Rights Watch, 7 June 2006. 75
CILDEKT (2002) ‘OSCE Report Refers to Kurdish Question’, CILDEKT, 16
July 2002, as quoted in IMK Weekly Information Service, No.
162, 16 July - 27 July 2002 (http://www.kurds.dk/english/2000/news109.html). 76 Aram (2002) Conspiracy and Crisis: Turkey and the Kurdish
Question: From the Nineties to the Present Day - Written by a
collective of journalists and researchers on behalf of Aram Publisher.
Aram, Istanbul, January, 2002 (http://www.zmag.org/content/ForeignPolicy/aram0122.cfm). 77
Yildiz, K and Muller, M. (2005) ‘The EU, Turkey and the Kurds’, in
Muller, M., Brigham, C., Westrheim, K. and Yildiz, K. (eds.) EU
Turkey Civic Commission: International Conference on Turkey, the Kurds
and the EU, European Parliament, Brussels, 22-23 November 2004 -
Conference Papers, KHRP, GB, p. 48. 78 The
New Anatolian (2006) ‘Turkey shrugs off PKK’s offer of conditional
cease-fire’, The New Anatolian, 25 August 2006 (http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=37395). 79 Dicle,
H. (2005) Statement made on 19 September 2005 at the Second EUTCC
International Conference on ‘EU Turkey and the Kurds’, held in the EU
Parliament, 19 - 21 September 2005 (http://www.eutcc.org/articles/8/20/document212.ehtml).
An ANF - Firat News Agency report, dated 30th August
2006, also stated that a “written statement of Kongra-Gel indicated
that ‘Koma Komalen Kurdistan (KKK, Confederalism of Kurdistan,
Kongra-Gel is the Assembly) made a peace declaration declared on 23
August, 2006, and they supported this. They also indicated that they
were in search of peaceful solution without violence for the
resolution of the Kurdish question and they are expecting a response”
from the Turkish state “on this regard” (‘Kongra Gel condemns bomb
attacks’, ANF - Firat News Agency, Accessed at: http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=13122). 80 As
quoted in Yilmaz, A. (2003) ‘Mustafa Karahan: Interview with Mustafa
Karahan, the head of DEHAP in Amed’, KurdishMedia.com, 9
January 2004 (http://www.kurdmedia.com/inter.asp?id=10099). 81 Mizgin
(2006) ‘We’ve Had Enough’ (http://rastibini.blogspot.com/2006/06/weve-had-enough.html). 82 Uzun,
M. (2005) ‘The Dialogue and Liberties of Civilizations’,
Presented at the Second EUTCC International Conference on ‘EU Turkey
and the Kurds’, held in the EU Parliament, 19 - 21 September 2005 (http://www.eutcc.org/articles/8/20/document217.ehtml). 83
Thomas, M. (2006) ‘There is one EU problem that is resolutely not going
away and will only get worse: that is, Turkey’s membership’, The
New Statesman, 24 April 2006 (http://www.newstatesman.com/200604240014). 84
According to Simon Cooper and Ruth Riordan, “Asci began the death fast
on International Lawyer’s Day, April 5, because, he says, he could no
longer sit back and watch his clients die” (‘On the death fast of
Lawyer Behic Asci’, Green Left Weekly, 16 August 2006, as
reproduced in Info Turk, August 2006, No. 336 (http://www.info-turk.be/336.htm#Istanbul_). 85
Cooper, S. and Riordan, R. (2006) ‘On the death fast of Lawyer Behic
Asci’, Green Left Weekly, 16 August 2006, as reproduced in
Info Turk, August 2006, No. 336 (http://www.info-turk.be/336.htm#Istanbul_). 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
Turkish Weekly Net (2006) ‘Turkey and Northern Iraq’, JTW and News
Agencies, 30 April 2006 (http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=30830). 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 Info
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
Diyarbakõr 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 Diyarbakõr province in 1993 (Akdeniz and others v Turkey).
The second was the ‘disappearance’ of three men from the village of
Cagùlayan 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 California Special 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. 122
Bianet News Center (2006) ‘Disregard of UN Warnings on Anti-Terror
Act’, Bianet News Center, 5 July 2006. 123 BIA
News Center (2006) ‘Human Rights Activists: “New Anti-Terror Bill
Incites More Violence”’, 20 April 2006, in Info-Turk, May 2006,
No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists). 124
WIPC/IFEX (2006) ‘The Writers in Prison Committee’s Appeal to Sezer on
ATL’, WIPC/IFEX, 21 July 2006 (http://www.info-turk.be/335.htm#Disregard). 125
Korkut T. (2006) ‘Mr. Sezer, Do Not Ratify The Terror Law’, BIA
News Center, 3 July 2006. 126
Korkut, T. (2006) ‘Human Rights Advisor: “TMY Violates Constitution”’, BIA
News Center, 3 July 2006. 127
Info-Turk (2006) ‘New Anti-Terror Law: End of the Timid
Democratisation’, Info-Turk, May 2006, No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists)
- citing The New Anatolian and other media, 19 April 2006. 128
Korkut, O. (2006) ‘Anti-Terror Schemes May Encourage Torture’, BIA
News Center, 26 April 2006, in Info Turk, May 2006,
No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists). 129 BIA
News Center (2006) ‘Reaction by NGOs: “New Terror Bill Takes All
Citizens Terrorist”’, 28 April 2006, in Info-Turk,
May 2006, No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists). 130 BIA
News Center (2006) ‘Reaction by NGOs: “New Terror Bill Takes All
Citizens Terrorist”’, 28 April 2006, in Info-Turk,
May 2006, No. 333 (http://www.info-turk.be/index.html#Activists). 131
Churchill, W (2003) Perversions of Justice, p. 347. For further
details on this, also refer to: Fernandes, D. and Ozden, I., US,
UK, German and NATO Inspired Psychological Warfare Operations Against
the ‘Kurdish Communist Threat’ in Turkey and Northern Iraq and
Fernandes, D. (2006) ‘On The Possibilities of Successfully Taking A
Case To The International Criminal Court’, in War and Occupation:
Human Rights Abuses, Torture and Disappearances Under Detention,
The 5th International Conference Against Disappearances, 16th
-20th May 2006, Diyarbakir, Turkey. Organised by The
International Committee Against Disappearances (ICAD) and Aiding and
Solidarity Association with the Families who lost their Relatives
(YAKAY-DER). 132
Keen, D. (2006) Endless War? Hidden Functions of the ‘War on
Terror’, p. 77. 133
Keen, D. (2006) Endless War? Hidden Functions of the ‘War on
Terror’, p. 77. 134
Turkish Daily News (2006) ‘Kretschmer blasts military for disrespect of
legal order’, Turkish Daily News, 23 September 2006. 135
Turkish Daily News (2006) ‘Kretschmer blasts military for disrespect of
legal order’, Turkish Daily News, 23 September 2006. 136 It
is interesting to note that, due to his remarks, “the European
Commission representative to Turkey should be declared persona non
grata, said Independent Republic Party (BCP) leader and former
Foreign Minister Mumtaz Soysal … He also added that the EU ambassadors
can say whatever they want in member countries but don’t have the
same right in candidate countries. At a conference on Friday,
Kretschmer said that particularly the security sector and the armed
forces” – currently driving Turkey’s US-UK backed ‘War on Terror’ – “
were [currently] held exempt from the principle of accountability and
that the Turkish military doesn't confine itself to carrying out the
mandate given to it by the political authority … Claiming that
security units don’t respect the legal and public order,
Kretschmer said that the biggest problem in Turkey in the EU
process is to provide stable institutions that provide
services within the framework of democratic norms, including the
security units” (The New Anatolian [2006] ‘BCP leader: Kretschmer
should be made persona non grata’, The New Anatolian, 25
September 2006). 137
Associated Press (2006) ‘Turkey’s human rights situation regressing,
European MP’s say’, Associated Press, 23 September 2006. 138
Aslan, A. (2006) ‘Wilson: “Reactionary” Debates Cacophonous’, Zaman.com,
4 October 2006 (http://www.zaman.com/?bl=international&alt=&trh=20061004&hn=37059).
Indeed, this view was being promoted by US governing circles in 2002,
even as “Britain [ostensibly] handed over command of the international
security force in Kabul … to Turkey [temporarily] and announced the
withdrawal of Royal Marine commandos who ha[d] been hunting al-Qaida
fighters in south-eastern Afghanistan … In a ceremony on a football
pitch”, Richard Norton-Taylor observed that “[US] Major
General John McColl handed over command to Turkey’s Major General Hilmi
Akin Zorlu. The US [wa]s keen [even then] to promote Turkey as a secular,
democratic role model for Afghanistan” – See
Norton-Taylor, R. (2002) ‘Britain hands over Kabul command to Turkish
forces’, The Guardian, 21 June 2002
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/ukresponse/story/0,,741067,00.html). 139 BIA
News Centre (2006) ‘Mayor Acquitted as DEHAP Faces New Court’, BIA
News Center, 28 September 2006. 140
Korkut, O. (2006) ‘Investigation Against Researchers on the Turkish
Army’, BIA News Center, as reproduced in Info Turk,
October 2006, No 338
(http://www.info-turk.be/338.htm#Sparks). 141 A
report from The Turkish Daily News, 3 October 2006 edition, as
reproduced by Info Turk, October 2006, No. 338 (http://www.info-turk.be/338.htm#Sparks). 142
Onderoglu, E. (2006) BIA News Center report, 25 September 2006,
as reproduced in Info Turk, September 2006, No. 337 (http://www.info-turk.be/337.htm#Droits). 143 BIA
News Center (2006) ‘TIHV: “Not only 301, Fourteen Articles Need
Change”’, BIA News Center, 22 September 2006 (http://www.info-turk.be/337.htm#Droits).
144 BIA
News Centre (2006) ‘Security Courts Relaunched For Journalists!’, BIA
News Centre, 25 September 2006. 145
Korkut, O. (2006) ‘TIHV: “September 12 Coup Intact: Seeking Rights
Still a Crime”’, BIA News, 12 September 2006 (http://www.info-turk.be/337.htm#TIHV_). 146 The
New Anatolian (2006) ‘Sparks fly over bilingual children’s book in
Diyarbakir’, The New Anatolian, 7 October 2006, as reproduced
in InfoTurk, October 2006, No. 338 (http://www.info-turk.be/338.htm#Sparks). 147
Yilmaz, M. (2006) ‘Lockheed Martin, Joseph Ralston, and the PKK’. 148
Yilmaz, M. (2006) ‘Lockheed Martin, Joseph Ralston, and the PKK’. 149 As
cited by Mizgin (2006) ‘The US PKK Co-Ordinator and Lockheed Martin’, 1
October 2006 (http://rastibini.blogspot.com/). 150 Market
Watch (2006) ‘DoD OK’s $2.9 bln sale to Turkey of 30 F-16
fighters’, Market Watch, 29 September 2006 151
Mizgin, in Rastbini, as cited in wotisitgood4.blogspot,
4 October 2006
(http://wotisitgood4.blogspot.com/2006/10/i-wonder-what-sibel-edmonds-would-say.html). 152 The BIA
News Center reports, for example, that: “Turkey’s Human Rights
Association (IHD) has issued a statement welcoming the new unilateral
and unconditional cease-fire declared by the outlawed Kurdistan Workers
Party (PKK), saying this was a historic opportunity to create the
conditions of a democratic solution to the country's Kurdish problem.
The Association said all sections of the society in favour of
freedoms had to participate in the debate on a solution in this period
and that the priority was to prevent the peace process from being
obstructed” - BIA News Center (2006) ‘IHD:
“Cease-Fire” is Historical Opportunity’, BIA News Center, 4
October 2006 (http://www.bianet.org/index_eng_root.htm).
Ertugrul Kurkcu has also concluded that: “In this period of tension,
the only positive development that has widened the area of
maneuverability for labour is the PKK ending its armed attacks for
an indefinite time” - Kurkcu, E. (2006) ‘Washington’s Preferences’,
Siyasi gazette, 5 October 2006. The
Association for Human Rights and Solidarity with the
Oppressed’s (MAZLUMDER’s) Chairman, Ayhan Bilgen, made the following
comments about the PKK’s ceasefire: “This is an opportunity for the
clashes in the country to come to end, the guns to be silenced, all
violence to come to an end” - BIA News Center (2006) ‘Tension Leads
to Restricting Freedoms’, BIA News Center, 4 October 2006. 153 Market
Watch has detailed the manner in which “Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT)
makes the fighters, which will be Block 50 models, and General Electric
Co. (GE) makes the engines. Other contractors [also] involved in the
deal include Boeing Co. (BA), L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL),
Raytheon Co. (RTN) and BAE Systems PLC (BA.LN)” - Market Watch
(2006) ‘DoD OK’s $2.9 bln sale to Turkey of 30 F-16 fighters’, Market
Watch, 29 September 2006 (http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?dist=newsfinder&siteid=google&guid=%7BF58DED41-F587-43F2-8F7B-FC2F889DBF0D%7D&keyword=).
My thanks to Mark Campbell for this lead. 154
According to Market Watch: “Congress has the power to block the
deal but rarely steps in” - Market Watch (2006) ‘DoD OK’s $2.9
bln sale to Turkey of 30 F-16 fighters’, Market Watch, 29
September 2006 (http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?dist=newsfinder&siteid=google&guid=%7BF58DED41-F587-43F2-8F7B-FC2F889DBF0D%7D&keyword=). 155
Mizgin (2006) ‘The US PKK Co-Ordinator and Lockheed Martin’, 1 October
2006 (http://rastibini.blogspot.com/). 156
Which has itself become embroiled in controversy - See: Mejia, M.
(2006) ‘The Secrets Behind “State Secrets”: How Turkey's Mafia-like
“Deep State” (and its Neocon Friends) Penetrated US Government’, (http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/13271)
and 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. Mizgin notes that “The
membership list of the ATC reads
like a Who's Who of corporate America, with the defense industry
prominently represented: Bechtel, Boeing, General Atomics, General
Dynamics, GE, Halliburton, Lockheed Martin, Motorola, Northrup
Grumman, Raytheon, Textron, United Defense and United
Technologies/Sikorsky. Those are the corporations that have filled
their coffers by soaking Kurdistan with Kurdish blood. Other corporate
members include: Archer Daniels MIdland, ChevronTexaco, Coca-Cola,
ExxonMobil, Frito Lay, Hyatt, Pepsi, Pfizer and Shell” – Mizgin (2005)
‘Blood Money’, Rasti, 31 December 2005 (http://rastibini.blogspot.com/2005/12/blood-money-incestuous-relationship.html). 157
Mizgin (2006) ‘The US PKK Co-Ordinator and Lockheed Martin’, 1 October
2006 (http://rastibini.blogspot.com/). 158
Mizgin (2006) ‘The US PKK Co-Ordinator and Lockheed Martin’, 1 October
2006 (http://rastibini.blogspot.com/). 159 AFP
(2006) ‘Turkey rejects Ocalan’s truce offer’, AFP, 30 September
2006. 160
F-16.net (2006) ‘Turkey - Turk Hava Kuvvetleri Turkish Air
Force – TuAF: Introduction’, F-16.net: The Ultimate F-16 Reference
website (http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article21.html).
161
Global Security.Org (2006) ‘F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Lightning
II’ (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-35.htm). My thanks to Mark Campbell for this lead and reference. 162
Global Security.Org (2006) ‘F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Lightning
II’ (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-35.htm). My thanks to Mark Campbell for this lead and reference. 163
Global Security.Org (2006) ‘F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Lightning
II’ (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-35.htm). My thanks to Mark Campbell for this lead and reference. 164 The
US public, often, indeed, scandalously subsidises these ‘costs’ of
‘procurement’ by the Turkish military, something which many concerned
US citizens remain unaware of. Mizgin cites a key report which has
concluded that: “The vast majority of US arms transfers to Turkey have
been subsidized by U.S. taxpayers. In many cases, these taxpayer
funds are supporting military production and employment in Turkey, not
in the United States. Of the $10.5 billion in U.S. weaponry delivered
to Turkey since the outbreak of the war with the PKK in 1984, 77% of
the value of those shipments - $8 billion in all - has been directly or
indirectly financed by grants and subsidized loans provided by the
US government. Many of the largest deals - such
as Lockheed Martin’s sale of 240 F-16’s to the Turkish air force
and the FMC Corporation’s provision of 1,698 armored vehicles to the
Turkish army - involve coproduction and offset provisions which steer
investments, jobs, and production to Turkey as a condition of the
sale. For example, Turkey’s F-16 assembly plant in Ankara - a
joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI)
- employs 2,000 production workers, almost entirely paid for with U.S.
tax dollars” – Mizgin (2006) ‘The US PKK Coordinator and Lockheed
Martin’, 1 October 2006 (http://rastibini.blogspot.com/2006/10/us-pkk-coordinator-and-lockheed-martin.html). 165 As
quoted in the F-16.net: The Ultimate F-16 Reference website
article entitled ‘Turkey - Turk Hava Kuvvetleri Turkish Air Force -
TuAF Introduction’ (http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article21.html). 166 F-16.net
(2006) ‘F-35 Lightning II News Turkey to buy 100 F-35 jets?’ (http://www.f-16.net/news_article1719.html).
167 Mark
Campbell, personal communication, 30th September 2006. 168
Lieven Dewitte, writing in F-16.net on 11 July 2002,
additionally clarified that “Turkey today (July 11th) became
the seventh international partner to sign up for the F-35 Joint
Strike Fighter program, joining the United Kingdom, Italy, the Netherlands,
Canada, Denmark and Norway. Australia also has announced its
intention to participate” (http://www.f-16.net/news_article20.html). 169 BBC
News (2006) ‘Kurdish rebels “announce truce”’, BBC News, 30
September 2006. 170 AFP
(2006) ‘Turkey rejects Ocalan’s truce offer’, AFP, 30
September 2006. 171
Turkish Daily News (2006) ‘Erdogan rejects call from Ocalan, seeks US
steps against PKK’, Turkish Daily News, 30 September 2006 172 (http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=55627). 173 As
quoted by Yilmaz, M. (2006) in ‘Lockheed Martin, Joseph Ralston, and
the PKK’ (citing a Turkish Daily News article: Accessed at: http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=55627). 174
Korkut, T. (2006) ‘Buyukanit: There is the threat of fundamentalism’, BIA
News Center, 4 October 2006. 175
Korkut, T. (2006) ‘The army’s role’, BIA News Center, 4
October 2006. 176 See
AFP (2006) ‘Turkish PM rejects Kurdish leader’s cease fire offer’, AFP,
29 September 2006. 177 The
New Anatolian, 22 September 2006, as reproduced by Info Turk,
‘General Basbug Seeks Public Support in Fighting Terror’, Info Turk,
September 2006, No. 337 (http://www.info-turk.be/337.htm#Buyukanit). 178 Cihan
News Agency, 13 September 2006, as reproduced in Info
Turk, ‘Gov’t Appoints Retired Gen. Baser As Special Envoy to Fight
PKK’, Info Turk, September 2006, No. 337 (http://www.info-turk.be/337.htm#Buyukanit). 179 The
New Anatolian (2006) ‘Gul warns: No solution to Kirkuk issue will
aggravate Iraq’s problems’, The New Anatolian, 24 September,
2006. 180
Cihan News Agency (2006) ‘Turkey to keep fighting PKK to the end - FM
Gul’, Cihan News Agency, 28 September 2006. 181 PNA (2006) ‘Turkey to consider PKK ceasefire’, PNA, 10
October 2006. 182 As
cited in: http://dozame.org/blog/2006/08/24/declaration-for-the-democratic-resolution-of-the-kurdish-question/ 183
Aslan, A. (2006) ‘Wilson: “Reactionary” Debates Cacophonous’, Zaman.com,
4 October 2006 (http://www.zaman.com/?bl=international&alt=&trh=20061004&hn=37059). 184 On
this point, Ted Rall, author of Silk Road to Ruin: Is Central Asia
the New Middle East?, comments: “It depends on what your definition
of ‘free’ is … Scratch the gloss of the gleaming energy-boom-funded
skyscrapers rising over the Kazakh metropolises of Almaty and Astana,
and it becomes clear that the United States is giving the red-carpet,
21-gun salute treatment to [yet] another right-wing dictator of the
variety we propped up during the Cold War … Nazarbayev, the Communist
Party boss of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR) at the time of
the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, has been Kazakhstan’s strongman
since independence … Early in 2005, Nazarbayev had the DVK [the main
opposition Democratic Choice of Kazakhstan party] banned entirely for
‘inciting social tension’ and ‘extremism’. A few weeks after promising
to release evidence that Nazarbayev and his family were involved in
oil-related corruption, Zamanbek Nurkadilov, a former Nazarbayev
cabinet minister who joined the nation’s sole remaining viable
opposition party, For a Fair Kazakhstan (NAZ), was found dead
at his home in Almaty, a pistol lying at his side. Nurkadilov had been
shot three times - twice in the chest and once in the head. Kazakh
authorities ruled his death a suicide … Misfortune [has] continued to
befall Kazakhs who sp[ea]k out against Nazarbayev. On February 13,
2006, reported Radio Free Europe, the bodies of Nurkadilov’s
replacement as NAZ leader and four aides ‘were discovered on a desolate
stretch of road outside Almaty ... their bodies riddled with bullets
and their hands bound behind their backs’. Altynbek Sarsenbayev had
recently announced his own intention to release proof of Nazarbayev and
his cronies’ misuse of oil revenues. The government blamed five rogue
officers of its KNB (ex-KGB) security service for the
contract killing. No one believes the official story. The Kazakh regime
… has ruthlessly crushed attempts to curtail freedom of expression, a
crucial building block of an open society. Journalists have been
threatened, beaten and jailed. After the leading independent newspaper Respublika
published an interview with a Russian politician that criticized
Nazarbayev in May 2005, it was ordered closed. A printing house that
agreed to publish a successor newspaper, Setkz, was shuttered
as well. The state Internet monopoly, controlled by one of Nazarbayev’s
daughters, censors block access to opposition and independent websites.
Since a presidential proclamation signed by President Bush in 2004 bans
visits by corrupt foreign officials to the United States, Nazarbayev -
embroiled in a ‘Kazakhgate’ influence peddling scandal scheduled for
federal court later this fall - was legally [supposed to be] ineligible
to come to Washington last week. Consultant and lobbyist James Giffen
will soon face charges that he funneled more than $78 million in bribes
from his energy company clients, most of it to Nazarbayev and his
former prime minister. According to the Justice Department, Giffen also
gave Nazarbayev’s wife fur coats and a snowmobile, and even paid
Nazarbayev’s daughter's tuition at George Washington University. US
officials call ‘Kazakhgate’ one of the largest violations of the
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in history. According to a reliable
source, high-ranking White House officials are pressuring the Justice
Department to drop the case. [The reason?]: Kazakhstan's geopolitical
importance [to the Bush administration] is obvious. It is the largest
producer of Caspian Sea oil, borders Russia, China and the other
Central Asian states, and has granted the US Air Force landing rights
at Almaty’s airport for operations in Afghanistan … Kazakhstan is
[also] the only Central Asian republic to have sent troops to Iraq. In
all the ways that matter, however, Nazarbayev presides over a police
state that is indistinguishable from his more notorious neighbors, such
as Islam Karimov, president of Uzbekistan. Karimov ordered and
personally supervised the massacre of at least 700 demonstrators in the
Uzbek city of Andijon. The May 13, 2005 incident [is] known in the
region as ‘Uzbekistan's Tiananmen Square’ … [Yet], Nazarbayev appeared
at a joint press conference with Karimov in March 2006, nearly a
year after the Andijon massacre. ‘Of course, we regret everything
that happened [at Andijon]’, said Nazarbayev. ‘However, it should be
said that another end [i.e., not killing the demonstrators] would
have destabilized now the whole region’. Destablization”, Rall
observes, “might have given Kazakstan’s 15 million citizens, 99 percent
of whom live in poverty while Nazarbayev steals the oil and gas beneath
their feet, a chance to liberate themselves. [Yet], sadly and once
again, the US government is siding with a dictator over the people”,
and, as in Turkey, supporting and ‘jointly’ working as a ‘partner’ in
the international ‘war on terror’, with terrorist forces
and regimes (All Ted Rall quotes here come from his article, ‘Bush
Gives 15 Million Muslims More Reasons to Hate Us’ - Accessed at: http://www.uexpress.com/tedrall/).
President Bush’s welcoming address to Nazarbayev is worth reading: “Mr.
President, thank you for coming. It's been my honor to
welcome the President of Kazakhstan … We’ve just had a very important
and interesting discussion. We discussed our desire to defeat extremism
and our mutual desire to support the forces of moderation [sic]
throughout the world. I thanked the President for his contribution to
helping a new democracy in Iraq survive and thrive and grow.
I thank very much the President for his concerns about Afghanistan’s
democracy, and his willingness to help in Afghanistan … We talked
about our commitment to institutions that will enable liberty to
flourish. I have watched very carefully the development of this
important country from one that was in the Soviet sphere to one
that now is a free nation. And I appreciate your leadership,
Mr. President. And I welcome you here to the White House …” -
Source: Office of the Press Secretary, The Oval Office (2006)
‘President Bush Welcomes President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan to the
White House’, White House Press Release, Office of the Press
Secretary, The Oval Office, Washington, DC, September 29, 2006
(http://www.state.gov/p/sca/rls/pr/2006/73384.htm). 185 The
PKK and other organisations, with Ocalan as their leader, have rejected
‘separatism’ for years now. The ‘separatism’ tag, therefore, is a
deliberately misleading one as far as the ‘terrorist’ PKK,
Kongra-Gel and KKK are concerned. The KKK (Kurdistan Democratic
Confederalism) Executive Council’s most recent statement on 20th
August 2006, for instance, clarified that: “We would like as a
movement” – with Ocalan at its head – “to emphasize, once again,
that the right solution is a democratic autonomy within the borders
of Turkey” - Declaration for the democratic resolution of the
Kurdish question, KKK [Kurdistan Democratic Confederalism] Executive
Council, 20 August 2006. Translation from Turkish original (Accessed
at: http://www.kurdmedia.com/articles.asp?id=13093
and http://dozame.org/blog/2006/08/24/declaration-for-the-democratic-resolution-of-the-kurdish-question/).
A BBC report, dated 19th August 2005, also clarifies that
“The Kurdish rebel group fighting for autonomy in south-eastern
Turkey … has announced a one-month ceasefire” - BBC News (2005)
‘Kurdish rebels declare ceasefire’, BBC News, Friday, 19 August
2005 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4166166.stm).
The Presidential Board of Koma Komalen Kurdistan (KKK - Democratic
Confederation of Kurdistan) issued the following statement on 30th
September 2006: “On the 28th September 2006, following the
decisions of the assembly, the Leader of Koma Komalen Kurdistan,
Apo (Abdullah Öcalan), declared once again to the public and the
movement the decision of a ceasefire … We will carry out our work for
this aim of a positive outcome in order to create the conditions for a
life within a democratic and free union and to solve the problem
within the borders of Turkey” (KKK Presidential Board Statement,
‘To the press and the public opinion’, 30th September 2006). 186
Knox, O. (2006) ‘Bush and Erdogan emphasize common ground after talks’,
Agence France Presse, 3 October 2006. 187
Reuters (2006) ‘Turkey seeks US help on Kurd rebels as ceasefire
starts’, Reuters, 2 October 2006. 188
Reuters (2006) ‘Report: Former IDF commandos secretly trained Kurdish
soldiers’, Reuters, as reproduced in Haaretz, 20
September 2006 (as reproduced in:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/765068.html). 189
Reuters (2006) ‘Report: Former IDF commandos secretly trained Kurdish
soldiers’, Reuters, as reproduced in Haaretz, 20
September 2006 (as reproduced in:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/765068.html). 190
Borger, J. (2003) ‘Israel trains US Assassination Squads in Iraq’, The Guardian , 9 December 2003 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1102940,00.html). 191
Korkut, T. (2006) ‘Turkey: Postponing Democracy and Peace’, BIA
News Center, 4 October 2006. 192
Korkut, T. (2006) ‘Turkey: Postponing Democracy and Peace’, BIA
News Center, 4 October 2006. 193
Demir, E. (2006) ‘PACE Criticizes Turkey’s Methods of Combating
Terrorism’, zaman.com, 5 October 2006. 194
Ozkaya, A. N. (2006) ‘PACE Approves Report on Kurds: “The cultural
situation of the Kurds”’, 5 October 2006. Source: Council of Europe and
Minorities, A. Noyan Ozkaya. Cihan News Agency clarifies that: “It must
be noted that the report’s recommendations, however, are
non-binding in nature” - The Turkish state, consequently, is not
obliged to impliment any of the recommendations - Cihan News
Agency (2006) ‘PACE Adopts Report on Kurdish Rights’, Cihan News
Agency, 5 October, 2006 (zaman.com). 195
Kurkcu, E. (2006) ‘Washington's Preferences’, Siyasi Gazete, 5
October 2006. 196 As
quoted in Info Turk (2006) ‘New Anti-Terror Law is Used Against the
Freedom of Expression’, Info Turk, September 2006, No. 337 (http://www.info-turk.be/337.htm#Droits). |