Turkish proverb

Someone on Reddit explained why so many people support Trump by quoting a Turkish proverb: 

The trees kept voting for the axe, for his handle was wood and they thought him one of them.

Martin Sheen for president

It isn't anything else but murder.

A U.S. citizen who lived in Turkey is among the nine people killed when Israeli commandos stormed a Turkish aid ship heading for the Gaza Strip, officials said today. The victim was identified as Furkan Dogan, 19, a Turkish-American. A forensic report said he was shot at close range, with four bullets in his head and one in his chest, according to the Anatolian news agency.

Dogan was a high school student studying social sciences in the town of Kayseri in central Turkey. He was born in Troy, N.Y., and moved to Turkey at the age of 2. He will be buried in his hometown tomorrow.

Dogan's body was returned to Turkey today along with eight others, all Turkish nationals, who were on board the Mavi Marmara.

About 3 minutes in

Is the best part....



Happy Tryptophan Day! Or Tofu Day...

I thought you said anybody who talked to bad guys

Was a Nazi appeaser, Georgie? What about your best buds Israel and Turkey?

Israel and Syria:

Jerusalem, Israel (AHN) - Israel and Syria have resumed indirect peace talks in Turkey over the weekend. According to Israel's military radio station, close aides of Israeli PM Ehud Olmert, traveled to Ankara to being the peace talks on Sunday under Turkish mediation.

Israeli President Shimon Peres, who is on a visit to the U.S. urged Syria on Sunday to enter into direct talks with Israel. He said that the leaders should meet directly to discuss the issues.

Turkey and Iran:

On June 6, General Ilker Basbug, the commander of the Turkish Land Forces, confirmed that Turkey and Iran were sharing intelligence and coordinating military operations against the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) - which is primarily composed of Turkish Kurds - and its Iranian affiliate, the Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK).

Both rebel groups have their headquarters and main training camps in the Qandil Mountains of northern Iraq. Although it has long been assumed that security cooperation between Turkey and Iran has included both intelligence-sharing and the coordination of military operations against the PKK and PJAK, Basbug's statement is the first public confirmation by a high-ranking Turkish military official.

Turkey and Iran first signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on security cooperation on July 29, 2004, three months after PJAK's inaugural congress in April 2004 and two months after the May 2004 decision by the PKK to return to violence following a five-year unilateral ceasefire. This agreement was reinforced on April 17, 2008, by a new MoU which foresaw a broadening and deepening of security cooperation between the two countries.

Well, they might be Nazi appeasers, but at least the Iraqi army is doing your bidding:

Baghdad - A fresh outbreak of violence across Iraq on Monday caused at least five fatalities while Iraq's army said it would not go ahead with a crackdown on Shiite militias in the southern Maysan province until a government deadline for militiamen to surrender their arms expires.

Ah, okay. But Maliki is Georgie's bestest bud and will support our military staying forever in Iraq in 58 bases and not being answerable to Iraqi law, right? I mean, that's not unreasonable, is it?

BAGHDAD — Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki raised the possibility that his country won't sign a status of forces agreement with the United States and will ask U.S. troops to go home when their U.N. mandate to be in Iraq expires at the end of the year.

Maliki made the comment after weeks of complaints from Shiite Muslim lawmakers that U.S. proposals that would govern a continued troop presence in Iraq would infringe on Iraq's sovereignty.

"Iraq has another option that it may use," Maliki said during a visit to Amman, Jordan. "The Iraqi government, if it wants, has the right to demand that the U.N. terminate the presence of international forces on Iraqi sovereign soil."

Kevin Hayden of American Street says it best: (my bold)

It should be noted, too, how perverse the political process is that has functioned for the past 8 years. Consider (a) the twin heads of Al Qaeda came from Saudi Arabia and Egypt, (b) Al Qaeda funding largely came from Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other Arab nations but has never been tracked to Iraq or Iran, (c) Al Qaeda terror training occurred in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Somalia, mostly, (d) nuclear design and technology came from AQ Khan of Pakistan, (e) base headquarters of Al Qaida’s principals was provided by Afghanistan, and (e) the 9-11 attackers came mostly from Saudi Arabia, plus Egypt and Yemen.

Out of the 10+ principal nations complicit in sustaining and equipping Al Qaeda or in spreading nuclear technology, the Bush administration remains allied with most of them and has only directly attacked Afghanistan. Plus it attacked a non-involved party (Iraq) and regularly threatens the non-involved Iran.

*Gasp* Then ... Then that means YOU are the Nazi appeaser, Georgie!

What do friends matter when oil is involved?

What is a little backstabbing anyway? Why should we worry about breaking our word to the Kurds? Because we want an oil pipeline? Because we want Turkey to owe us when we attack Iran? Because we are holding off China and Russia in a land grab of rich oil deposits? Because Israel wants the Kurds to attack Iran?



The Asia Times:

Again, it is the oil and gas supplies from Iraq that will help realize the viability of the 3,300-kilometer Nabucco pipeline (running from the Caspian Sea via Turkey and the Balkan states to Austria), without which Russia's tightening grip over the European energy market cannot be loosened, which, in turn, holds profound implications for Russia's relations with Europe and for the US's trans-Atlantic leadership.

US policy review on Turkey
Thus, all in all, Washington has estimated the urgent need to accommodate Turkey's aspirations as a regional power. The Bush administration seems to have undertaken a major policy review toward Turkey in the October-November period last year around the same time it considered the follow-up on the troop "surge" in Iraq. It concluded that for a variety of reasons, abandoning Iraqi Kurds to their fate is a small price to pay for reviving Turkey's friendship.

The turning point came during the visit of Erdogan to the US in November. Almost overnight, the body language of US-Turkey relations began to change. The chilly rhetoric abruptly changed to warm backslapping. The emphasis was on the commonality of interests in the struggle against terrorism. There was an unmistakable impatience in the US calls on the Iraqi Kurdish leadership to restrain the PKK through concrete steps.

Immediately after Erdogan's visit, deputy chief of the Turkish General Staff, General Ergin Saygun, received his American counterpart, General James Cartwright, and the US's top commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, in Ankara for follow-up discussions. They established a mechanism for intelligence-sharing. And the US began supplying Turkey with real-time intelligence regarding PKK activities in northern Iraq.

By the time US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice arrived in Ankara a week later in early December, she could already acknowledge that Turkey had a "comprehensive plan" to fight the PKK. The tacit understanding with the US enabled Turkey to launch the air strikes inside northern Iraq from December 16 onward. Washington - and European countries - openly accepted the legitimacy of Turkey's attacks on the PKK bases. It was a major diplomatic and military victory for Ankara.

[snip] (my bold)

Even the left-wing Kemalist Cumhuriyet newspaper acknowledged, "A new era is upon us [in US-Turkey relations]." With a sense of deja vu, Iraqi Kurd leaders began realizing that Bush has done a Kissingerian trick on them and the ground has shifted beneath their feet. Since November, they have been resigned to the inevitability of Turkish military operations inside northern Iraq. More important, they have assessed that with the u-turn in US policy, the odds are heavily stacked against them. The Kurds know from long experience it is futile to be defiant of a superpower, especially when it bonds with a strong regional power - at least for the time being.

Both Barzani and Kurdish leader and President Jalal Talabani have accepted that as long as the Turkish operations are in the nature of "limited military incursions to remote, isolated, uninhabited regions" of northern Iraq - to quote Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebary, who is also Barzani's nephew - they won't make a fuss about the Turkish violation of Iraqi sovereignty. When the Turkish jets and helicopter gunships first appeared over the northern Iraqi skies in mid-December, it was apparent that Barzani had abandoned the PKK and henceforth the latter would be on its own. Barzani expects Ankara to appreciate his attitude as a serious concession and an act of goodwill.

[snip]

Certainly, when someone takes its help, Washington usually expects the friend to return the favor. Ankara can't be an exception. But, will the AKP reciprocate? It will be a tough call. The Islamist AKP government will seriously ponder over the irony of ordering troops to get cracking on militant Islamists as part of a NATO force, which a growing number of alienated Pashtuns in Afghanistan and Pakistan view as an occupation army. Turkey would consult its close friend, Pakistan.

But Bush is running out of time. He will expect Erdogan and Gul to stand up and be counted as true friends by the time NATO gathers for its summit in Romania in early April. Hyland sums up, "Given the stakes for the United States, the tough negotiations over the NATO/ISAF mission in Afghanistan have just begun with other NATO allies as well as with Turkey. After making a general appeal for additional troops across the entire NATO community, the United States appears to have chosen Turkey as the 'best-chance' ally to focus on for immediate results.
"Turkey's success against the PKK since real-time intelligence made it possible to hit targets in Iraq with pinpoint precision, is a considerable inducement in the ongoing discussions, especially as spring approaches - the traditional season for the commencement of another PKK campaign."

Here is the International Herald Tribune:

Turkey has assured Iraq and the U.S. military that the operation will be limited to attacks on rebels. Both the United States and the European Union consider the PKK a terrorist group.

The Iraqi government has criticized the offensive.

"We know the threats that Turkey is facing, but military operations will not solve the PKK problem," Ali al-Dabbagh, an Iraqi government spokesman, said Saturday.

The rebels, meanwhile, warn that they have the advantage of fighting on their home terrain.

"We are using guerrilla fighting techniques and not fighting as one fixed front," said Havaw Ruaj, a PKK spokesman. The rebels are skilled at fighting in the rocky mountainous area and changing their positions, he added.

Massoud Barzani, head of the regional administration in the semiautonomous Kurdish area, warned that Turkey would face large-scale resistance if it targeted civilians in its incursion.

Kurdish demands have run the spectrum from self-rule to more-limited rights, like increased freedom to educate and broadcast in their language.

The Turkish government granted some cultural rights to Kurds as part of its bid to join the European Union. But many Kurds, who make up 20 percent of Turkey's population of 75 million, chafe under state controls on freedom of expression.

And from another article in The Hindu:

No wonder, Mr. Erdogan hit out at Washington’s sophistry in his recent interview with Sunday Times: “We have told President Bush numerous times how sensitive we are about this issue [PKK] but up till now we have not had a single positive result. America is our strategic partner. But in northern Iraq, we feel that both the terrorist organisation and the administration there are sheltering behind America… It makes us sad to see American weapons being found in the possession of the terrorist organisation acting against Turkey.”

In principle, Washington counsels a “political solution” to Turkey’s Kurdish problem. In essence, it is nudging Turkey to negotiate directly with the KRG. Meanwhile, Turkey feels the pain of PKK terrorism. As Opposition leader Deniz Baykal put it, “The knife has reached the bone.”

Ankara is on a painful learning curve. It has no choice but to knock on Washington’s door. The alternative is to invade Iraq, which could get it into a quagmire with frightful consequences. Yet, Turkey is one of America’s oldest transatlantic partners — a founder of the NATO, in fact. It remains crucial for the U.S. strategic interests in the Middle East and the Black Sea regions.

Washington is bargaining with Turkey. Why so? The fact remains that Turkey’s regional policies have changed course under the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government. Ankara has become noticeably circumspect in the recent years toward the U.S. regional policies. Apart from the Islamist roots of the AKP government, other factors have come into play. Turkey’s refusal to join the invasion of Iraq in 2003; the AKP government’s dealings with the Hamas leadership in Palestine; independent stance on Lebanon; warming of ties between Turkey and Iran and Syria; Ankara’s calibrated distancing from the U.S. strategy in Iraq; strengthening of Russia-Iran cooperation; growing flexibility in Turkey’s relations with the West; and a newfound proximity between Turkey and the East — all these have added up as complicating factors in the U.S-Turkey relations in the past four years.

In sum, Ankara is being made to realise that it simply cannot afford to have an independent foreign policy in its surrounding regions. The bottom line, as far as Washington is concerned, is Turkey forms part of the Western security system and the bondage is like a Catholic marriage — in perpetuity. As the new cold war gathers momentum, there is added urgency for Washington that Turkey should not remain a bystander, as in the Iraq invasion of 2003, if a U.S. military strike against Iran ensues.

The standoff in the inhospitable mountains of the Turkish-Iraqi border region becomes a morality play, a spectacle of the quintessence of “strategic partnerships” in contemporary world. Not too long ago, strategic thinkers in their ivory towers would have thought that the U.S. regional policy provided for Turkey a special status as a “balancer” in the Middle East.

Lars Akerhaug of The Monthly Review Magazine suggests this ploy:

And it looks as if the PKK is consciously trying to get Turkey involved in Iraq. Maybe they want to weaken the relations between Turkey and the US (they're bad enough already) and thus indirectly strengthen their own relations to Washington. Maybe the guerrillas are betting that the neocons once again will attempt to exploit the Kurds, this time in a crusade against Iran?

The situation in Turkey, Iraq, and Kurdistan is a bright example of how geopolitics is centered around the United States. Since the Iraq war, Turks and Kurds have fought over support from the White House. Anyone could have predicted the current conflict. At the same time the US never had many options. They don't exactly have plenty of friends in this part of the world. This war could easily become the last step towards the collapse of the US occupation of Iraq.

So... we need Turkey to be our friend again and definitely not Russia's and we will ignore their troubles with Kurdistan and Armenia so we can run a pipeline to India while preventing China and Russia from taking over areas of Kazakhstan and other oil rich countries surrounding the Caspian Sea while we plan to attack Iran where we will need the Kurds to help because Israel wants Iran's nuclear program to be stopped while we fight an unending civil war in Iraq while paying Sunnis to stop fighting Shiites and take time to fight al-Qaeda who are rebuilding in Afghanistan and we are now sending military advisors to help fight the insurgents in Pakistan and keep Musharraf from falling off his throne.

Did I miss anybody?

crossposted at SteveAudio

Sibel Edmonds is finally getting attention

And look who has run this article! The American Conservative:

Charismatic and articulate, the 37-year-old Edmonds has deftly worked the system to get as much of her story out as possible, on one occasion turning to French television to produce a documentary entitled “Kill the Messenger.” Passionate in her convictions, she has sometimes alienated her own supporters and ridden roughshod over critics who questioned her assumptions. But despite her shortcomings in making her case and the legitimate criticism that she may be overreaching in some of her conclusions, Edmonds comes across as credible. Her claims are specific, fact-based, and can be documented in detail. There is presumably an existing FBI file that could demonstrate the accuracy of many of her charges.

[snip]

Edmonds’s revelations have attracted corroboration in the form of anonymous letters apparently written by FBI employees. There have been frequent reports of FBI field agents being frustrated by the premature closure of cases dealing with foreign spying, particularly when those cases involve Israel, and the State Department has frequently intervened to shut down investigations based on “sensitive foreign diplomatic relations.” One such anonymous letter, the veracity of which cannot be determined, cites transcripts of wiretaps involving Marc Grossman and a Turkish Embassy official between August and December 2001, described above, in which Grossman warned the Turk that Brewster Jennings was a CIA cover company. If the allegation can be documented from FBI files, the exposure of the Agency cover mechanism took place long before journalist Robert Novak outed the company in his column on Valerie Plame in 2003.

[snip]

Curiously, the states-secrets gag order binding Edmonds, while put in place by DOJ in 2002, was not requested by the FBI but by the State Department and Pentagon—which employed individuals she identified as being involved in criminal activities. If her allegations are frivolous, that order would scarcely seem necessary. It would have been much simpler for the government to marginalize her by demonstrating that she was poorly informed or speculating about matters outside her competency. Under the Bush administration, the security gag order has been invoked to cover up incompetence or illegality, not to protect national security. It has recently been used to conceal the illegal wiretaps of the warrantless surveillance program, the allegations of torture and the CIA’s rendition program, and to shield the telecom industry for its collaboration in illegal eavesdropping.

Both Senators Grassley and Leahy, a Republican and a Democrat, who interviewed her at length in 2002, attest to Edmonds’s believability. The Department of Justice inspector general investigation into her claims about the translations unit and an internal FBI review confirmed most of her allegations. Former FBI senior counterintelligence officer John Cole has independently confirmed her report of the presence of Pakistani intelligence service penetrations within the FBI translators’ pool.

Edmonds wasn’t angling to become a media darling. She would have preferred to testify under oath before a congressional committee that could offer legal protection and subpoena documents and witnesses to support her case. She claims that a number of FBI agents would be willing to testify, though she has not named them.

But this information is not good:

Prior to 2006, Congressman Henry Waxman of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee promised Edmonds that if the Democrats gained control of Congress, he would order hearings into her charges. But following the Democratic sweep, he has been less forthcoming, failing to schedule hearings, refusing to take Edmonds’s calls, and recently stonewalling all inquiries into the matter. It is generally believed that Waxman, a strong supporter of Israel, is nervous about exposing an Israeli lobby role in the corruption that Edmonds describes. It is also suspected that Waxman fears that the revelations might open a Pandora’s box, damaging Republicans and Democrats alike.

[snip]

Sibel Edmonds makes a number of accusations about specific criminal behavior that appear to be extraordinary but are credible enough to warrant official investigation. Her allegations are documentable: an existing FBI file should determine whether they are accurate. It’s true that she probably knows only part of the story, but if that part is correct, Congress and the Justice Department should have no higher priority. Nothing deserves more attention than the possibility of ongoing national-security failures and the proliferation of nuclear weapons with the connivance of corrupt senior government officials.

C'mon, Waxman! You've been a hero in pursuing corruption and injustice so far. Take on Sibel Edmonds' case and let the truth be told. Corruption on this level must be addressed even though it looks like it's both sides of the aisle.

No wonder the Bush administration has tried to shut Sibel Edmonds up

They have been trying for years:

A WHISTLEBLOWER has made a series of extraordinary claims about how corrupt government officials allowed Pakistan and other states to steal nuclear weapons secrets.

Sibel Edmonds, a 37-year-old former Turkish language translator for the FBI, listened into hundreds of sensitive intercepted conversations while based at the agency’s Washington field office.

She approached The Sunday Times last month after reading about an Al-Qaeda terrorist who had revealed his role in training some of the 9/11 hijackers while he was in Turkey.

Edmonds described how foreign intelligence agents had enlisted the support of US officials to acquire a network of moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions.

Among the hours of covert tape recordings, she says she heard evidence that one well-known senior official in the US State Department was being paid by Turkish agents in Washington who were selling the information on to black market buyers, including Pakistan.

The name of the official – who has held a series of top government posts – is known to The Sunday Times. He strongly denies the claims.

However, Edmonds said: “He was aiding foreign operatives against US interests by passing them highly classified information, not only from the State Department but also from the Pentagon, in exchange for money, position and political objectives.”

She claims that the FBI was also gathering evidence against senior Pentagon officials – including household names – who were aiding foreign agents.

“If you made public all the information that the FBI have on this case, you will see very high-level people going through criminal trials,” she said.

[snip]

Edmonds, a fluent speaker of Turkish and Farsi, was recruited by the FBI in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Her previous claims about incompetence inside the FBI have been well documented in America.

She has given evidence to closed sessions of Congress and the 9/11 commission, but many of the key points of her testimony have remained secret. She has now decided to divulge some of that information after becoming disillusioned with the US authorities’ failure to act.

One of Edmonds’s main roles in the FBI was to translate thousands of hours of conversations by Turkish diplomatic and political targets that had been covertly recorded by the agency.

A backlog of tapes had built up, dating back to 1997, which were needed for an FBI investigation into links between the Turks and Pakistani, Israeli and US targets. Before she left the FBI in 2002 she heard evidence that pointed to money laundering, drug imports and attempts to acquire nuclear and conventional weapons technology.

“What I found was damning,” she said. “While the FBI was investigating, several arms of the government were shielding what was going on.”

The Turks and Israelis had planted “moles” in military and academic institutions which handled nuclear technology. Edmonds says there were several transactions of nuclear material every month, with the Pakistanis being among the eventual buyers. “The network appeared to be obtaining information from every nuclear agency in the United States,” she said.

They were helped, she says, by the high-ranking State Department official who provided some of their moles – mainly PhD students – with security clearance to work in sensitive nuclear research facilities. These included the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory in New Mexico, which is responsible for the security of the US nuclear deterrent.

[snip]

She has always claimed that she was victimised for being outspoken and was vindicated by an Office of the Inspector General review of her case three years later. It found that one of the contributory reasons for her sacking was that she had made valid complaints.

The US attorney-general has imposed a state secrets privilege order on her, which prevents her revealing more details of the FBI’s methods and current investigations.

Her allegations were heard in a closed session of Congress, but no action has been taken and she continues to campaign for a public hearing.

She was able to discuss the case with The Sunday Times because, by the end of January 2002, the justice department had shut down the programme.

She has been forced into silence by court order and commands from her bosses. She's been under extreme scrutiny and pressure from those who do not want the truth to get out.

It's time we heard all of what she has to say.

Doing just what the White House has done

Go after terrorists with no thought as to consequences:

Turkish warplanes have bombed suspected Kurdish rebel bases deep inside northern Iraq - in what appears the first time fighter jets have been used.

They targeted the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) in areas near the border, officials said. The Turkish media said up to 50 planes were used.

Iraqi officials say bombs hit 10 villages, killing one woman, while the PKK reported seven deaths.

There is nothing we can complain about, is there?

Preparing for a double double-cross and a bombing of Iran

Pepe Escobar of the Asia Times shows the complex tangle of Iraq's neighboring countries jockeying for position and power that Bush's invasion has activated and possibly losing Turkey to Iran and joining Russia and China: (my bold)

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a fine politician, knew even before he set foot in Washington on Monday that President George W Bush could not possibly have anything tangible to offer him on the explosive Turkey vs Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) dossier, apart from Pentagon aerial intelligence passed on to Turkish generals.

Erdogan, although describing himself as "happy" with his talks with Bush, may have left with nothing substantial. But at least he got a sound bite from Bush, who upgraded the PKK to the status of an enemy of America. Bush told Erdogan, "The PKK is a terrorist organization. They're an enemy of Turkey, they're an enemy of Iraq and they're an enemy of the United States."

Pity the US president could not possibly follow his own logic and add that the Party for Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK - the PKK's Iran arm - is an enemy of Iran, an enemy of Iraq but a friend of the United States - which is arming and financing its fighters.

[snip]

Way beyond Turkey's troubles with the PKK, it all comes back to the stark fact that Turkey simply cannot accept a virtually independent Iraqi Kurdistan in its southeast border - exactly the outcome sought by the US-Israeli axis.

Bush and his inner circle have bought time to calculate the odds on whom to double-cross. Will it be North Atlantic Treaty Orgaization ally Turkey, with its handy Incirlik base, anti-US public opinion and no oil; or pro-US Iraqi Kurds, with lots of oil and their Israeli-trained peshmerga (armed forces)? Tough call. A poker player familiar with Bush administration methods would bet on a double double-cross, complete with a "blame it on Iran" sequel and a "bomb Iran" grand finale.

Ankara's logic remain flawless, at least from a "war on terror" angle. If Washington invaded both Afghanistan and Iraq to fight "terrorists", Ankara has the same rights to invade its terrorist-harboring neighbor, which just happens to be an American neo-colony. The irony is obviously lost on the Bush administration.

[snip]

Washington is more the loser because virtually no one in Turkey is shedding tears for what happens to their 57-year-old alliance. According to the June 2007 Pew Global Attitudes Project, no less than 83% of Turkey's public opinion had an "unfavorable view" of the US, ahead of Egypt and Jordan (both at 78%) and Pakistan (68%). All of these governments - but not their populations - are US allies. It's fair to assume these numbers are rising.

Russia for its part cannot but applaud the newfound Turkish-Persian entente. Non-stop Bush administration heavy handedness is actually fast erasing historical grievances and paving the way towards a new Eurasian configuration, with Turkey-Iran getting closer to Russia-China.

[snip]

Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq opened a Pandora's box that only now starts to be seen for its true incendiary potential. Turkey threatening to strike Iraq to protect its national security is a carbon copy of Bush invading Iraq in 2003. Moreover, "Iraq" is actually no more; it's been smashed into three virtually independent statelets - exactly what Israel wanted in the first place.

Israel is so keen on an independent Iraqi Kurdistan because this is the way towards a new Kirkuk-Haifa oil pipeline (the old one was shut down in 1948) - which will pass though three American bases and cross US-friendly Jordan. A complicating factor is that at the same time Tel Aviv avidly coddles racist, Kurd-hating Turkish generals.

And with this double-crossing back-stabbing power-grabbing going on, we have an administration that ignores its diplomats.

It's always about the oil, isn't it?

Another front opens up

Turkish warplanes have bombed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) targets along the Iraqi border in southeast Turkey, the country's semi-official Anatolia news agency has said.

The agency said fighter jets from an air force base at Diyarbakir, the main city in the mainly Kurdish southeast, bombed and destroyed several PKK positions on Wednesday.

It said the bombings particularly targeted PKK routes in high mountainous areas.

The raids were said to have been conducted in four provinces, Sirnak and Hakkari, which border Iraq and neighbouring Siirt and Van, which abut the Iranian border.

Update: And Iraq acknowledges that al-Maliki is weak and cannot control the Kurds:

In Baghdad, politicians acknowledged that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki lacked the political and military muscle needed to fulfill his pledge to crack down on rebels from the Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, who last week killed 12 Turkish soldiers and captured eight in an ambush in Turkey.

Iraqi Kurdish officials indicated that they were unlikely to help in any crackdown, with the regional government's spokesman denying that there are PKK bases in northern Iraq.

"We believe that the statements of Mr. Maliki about closing the centers of the PKK don't apply to us because we do not have any centers," the spokesman, Jamal Abdullah, said.

Turkey advances on the Kurds

But such an action could wildly backfire:

The government acted after 15 soldiers were killed within two days last week, bringing the year's total to 200 such casualties, and public clamor for a strong military response to separatist insurgents.

Turkish troops and military hardware are amassed now along the Iraq border to the southeast.

The United States, the European Union and Russia have advised Turkey against unilateral military action. The Iraqi government has said any Turkish incursion would infringe on its territorial integrity.

For the time being, Turks are not in listening mode. Back in April, Chief of Staff Gen Yasar Buyukanit said a military operation was feasible and advisable, but the government shied away from any move in view of parliamentary elections on July 22. But now, with casualties rising, government spokesman Cemil Cicek announced after an emergency meeting: "Time for words is over."

Funerals of fallen soldiers often turn into rallies for revenge, and calls for a strong military response.
[snip]
Professor Ilter Turan, a leading analyst of Turkish affairs and vice-president of the International Political Science Association, believes Turkey and the US can still work out differences in northern Iraq without a military move by Turkey. "With Turkey determined to crush the PKK, it is feasible that the United States will push Iraqi Kurds to capture and turn over to Turkey one or two top rebel leaders. It will placate Turkish public opinion and avoid a military move by Turkey."

In its approach to northern Iraq, the Turkish fear is that if an oil-rich independent Kurdistan emerges from an Iraqi meltdown, its own Kurds (up to 20% of the population of 72 million) may also make similar demands or at least press for more autonomy, or even a separate homeland entity within Turkey.

Sedat Laciner, head of the independent Ankara-based International Strategic Research Organization, says that a Turkish move into northern Iraq would be seen outside of Turkey as "invasion" and "occupation" and could lead to increased trans-boundary Kurdish nationalism affecting also Iran and Syria, both with sizeable Kurdish minorities (four million in Iran, two million in Syria). Iraq counts five million Kurds in its north.

Laciner told IPS that the financial cost to Turkey of an attack into northern Iraq could be US$10 billion in flight of foreign capital, quite apart from the cost of the military operation. The move could also doom Turkey's controversial bid for full EU membership.

Update from the AP:

SIRNAK, Turkey (AP) -- Dozens of Turkish military vehicles loaded with soldiers and heavy weapons rumbled toward the Iraq border on Monday after an ambush by guerrilla Kurds that left eight soldiers missing and killed 12. Iraq's president said the rebels would announce a cease-fire later in the day.

Turkey's military said it had had no contact with the eight soldiers after Sunday's clash and said 34 guerrillas had been killed so far in a counteroffensive. A pro-Kurdish news agency said the eight were captured - a claim that would make it the largest seizure since 1995, when guerrillas grabbed eight soldiers and took them to northern Iraq.

The ambush on Sunday outraged an already frustrated public. Demonstrations erupted across the country and opposition leaders called for an immediate strike against rebel bases in Iraq, despite appeals for restraint from Iraq, the U.S. and European leaders.

Oh, look, a new front opens up in the glorious Iraqi Freedom War

Just what we need:

Ankara, Turkey (AHN) - Turkey's parliament overwhelmingly approved cross-border military operations against Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq Wednesday, with a 507-19 vote. The authorization is good for a year, however, and so far, Turkish leaders seem poised to allow more time for a diplomatic resolution before sending more troops across the Iraqi border.

Turkey holds the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) responsible for the deaths of 15 soldiers and 12 civilians earlier this month, which was apparently part of an ongoing campaign for self-rule. The PKK considers parts of southeastern Turkey, northeastern Iraq, northeastern Syria and northwestern Iran to be Kurdistan, and since 1984, they have launched an ongoing campaign to establish a Kurdish state. The militant struggle has met with over two dozen attacks by the Turkish military in the past twenty years and has claimed over 30,000 lives.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan claims the recent attack was launched from PKK training camps in northern Iraq.

Iraqi leaders are working hard to convince Turkey to exercise restraint while they attempt to quell tensions and persuade the PKK to break up the camps and lay down its arms. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki telephoned his Turkish counterpart early Wednesday, hours prior to the vote, to reiterate his intention to put a halt to the PKK's "terrorist activities," appealing for continued dialogue between the two countries. Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, meanwhile, has traveled to Ankara to issue the same appeal for diplomacy.

Nothing like pissing off the last friend in the region

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) -- With Turkish-U.S. relations strained, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Friday that Turkey would not be deterred by the diplomatic consequences if it decides to stage a cross-border offensive into Iraq against Kurdish rebels.

"If such an option is chosen, whatever its price, it will be paid," Erdogan told reporters in response to a question about the international repercussions of such a decision, which would strain ties with the United States and Iraq. "There could be pros and cons of such a decision, but what is important is our country's interests."

Erdogan also had harsh words for the United States, which opposes a Turkish incursion into northern Iraq -- one of the country's few relatively stable areas.

"Did they seek permission from anyone when they came from a distance of 10,000 kilometers and hit Iraq?" he said. "We do not need anyone else's advice."

Analysts say Turkey could be less restrained about defying the United States because of a congressional committee's approval of a resolution labeling the mass killings of Armenians around the time of World War I as genocide.

"Democrats are harming the future of the United States and are encouraging anti-American sentiments," Erdogan said. Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives support the resolution.

Erdogan said Turkey was ready to sacrifice good ties with Washington if necessary.

The Asian Times:

In the face of ambushes on Sunday linked to the PKK, in which more than 10 Turkish soldiers were killed, and the subsequent escalation of tension with Turkey, the Iraqi Kurdish leadership appears to be facing the situation with a certain aplomb - at least in its rhetoric. In a telephone interview, the foreign minister for the Kurdish area of Iraq, Falah M Bakir, said, "Of course we understand Turkey’s concerns, but we don’t believe that crossing the border will effectively address them."
Bakir, who is in New York for a meeting of the UN General Assembly, said that his regional government and Turkish officials are currently reduced to communicating with each other through the media. In the wake of the recent elections in Turkey, Bakir said he and his colleagues had held out the hope that a constructive dialogue with Turkey would begin. "Unfortunately there is no dialogue right now. But we are ready for talks."

When asked about Turkey’s concerns that Iraqi-Kurdish officials are not doing enough to counter the PKK, Bakir said that the group is trying to further its goals through peaceful, political aims. But when asked, he did not deny that the group could be responsible for the recent attacks in Turkey. He added that the PKK is spread out in a mountainous terrain on the border, does not have formal bases that can be attacked, and is not part of the official political structure of his regional government.

[snip]

Still, an escalation of Turkish military activity within the Kurdish region of Iraq could be risky. If the Turkish military hits civilians, Iraq would respond to Turkey, potentially causing far-reaching problems in bilateral relations. And then there is the question of civil-military relations in Turkey. The current government, with its ostensible Islamic leanings, already has strained relations with the military, which is seen by some as the caretaker of secularism in Turkey.

[snip]

For the United States, balancing the interests of the generally pro-American Iraqi Kurds, whose region is the only showcase of stability in Iraq, and NATO ally Turkey, will continue to demand diplomatic dexterity, noted Barkey. Such dexterity is something which is in short supply in the lower levels of the US State Department, at the assistant-secretary level, he added.

And there is another fresh wrinkle. Turkey warned on Thursday that relations with the US would be harmed by a US House committee’s approval on Wednesday of a non-binding resolution calling the 1915 massacres of Armenians by Ottoman Turks "genocide". The 27-21 decision by the House of Representatives foreign affairs committee comes before a vote in the full House in coming weeks, and occurred in spite of a warning from President George W Bush that cooperation with Turkey and the fate of US troops in Iraq could be at stake.

Update: Bryan at Why Now? offers an excellent synopsis on Turkey's history and the recall of the Turkish ambassador from the United States.

Why are we arming Saudis?

The rest of the world's mouths are agape at this:

Saudi Arabia? Isn't that the country:
- from which came 15 of the 19 men responsible for the attack on the United States on September 11, 2001?
- that opposed the March 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq and whose king, this March, called the invasion an "illegal occupation"?
- that told the United States to remove its troops and find some other country for the US Central Command's (CENTCOM) forward command post?
- whose border is so poorly monitored that 75% of all foreign fighters crossing into Iraq do so from Saudi territory, far more than from Syria?
- whose autocratic government either will not or cannot prevent its youth from going to Iraq - an estimated 40% of all foreigners fighting US troops and Iraqi government forces are Saudi nationals - where they become bomb makers, snipers, and suicide bombers?
- that nearly 60 years after the creation of the modern State of Israel still refuses to extend diplomatic recognition to that country?

No matter how deft the White House "spin", there will be considerable congressional opposition to the sale. Previous Congresses have opposed sales of weapons to the Saudis on the grounds that the kingdom has never signed a peace agreement with Israel. This time, the opposition is fueled by the lack of sustained support from Riyadh for US aims in Iraq and in the "global war on terrorism".

Cost of oil
There is also the sense among some members of Congress that the Saudis have not acted to control the soaring costs of energy. In the run-up to the 2004 US elections, the Saudis allegedly promised they would increase production if necessary to preclude a price spike that might hurt the re-election prospects of the George W Bush-Dick Cheney ticket.

Once the US election was concluded, however, the Saudis did little if anything to curb higher prices - first to $40 and then to $50 per barrel - pleading market forces beyond their control. Coincidentally with the announcement of the proposed arms sale, the price of a barrel of oil hit $78. Yet there was only silence from the Saudis.

From the perspective of the hardliners in Bush's White House, the Saudis were undercutting every US goal in the Middle East, particularly the current president's vision of a democratic Iraq as the seedbed for transforming autocratic regimes to democracies.
[snip]

Washington has been insisting that there is no military solution to the region's trauma. Yet it is proposing not only $20 billion in weapons to the Saudis but another $13 billion to Egypt and $30 billion to Israel - a total of $63 billion for weapons in a part of the world already awash in modern arms. And this total apparently doesn't include $40 million in guns, bullets, rockets, missiles, small-arms ammunition, night-vision goggles, and spare parts for the Lebanese Army this year and another $280 million for 2008. Nor does it include the $3 billion Iraq is spending on weapons and ammunition - all of which are contributing to the current mayhem in these two countries.

Nonetheless, since Israel has already said it will not oppose the sale, it is unlikely that Congress will vote to block it or even to amend it. As for the Pentagon, it hopes to save money through economy of scale for items produced for either the Saudis or Israelis. And of course US companies that build weapons and munitions are pleased at the prospect of new contracts and new profits.

The irony in this whole affair is that Bush started the Iraq war over weapons that never existed and that have not been used since 1945. Now his administration seems to think the way to end the war is to make sure that there are more weapons - ones that kill thousands every day. Go figure!

Can somebody explain this again? We are arming the Saudis who are sending their radicalized Sunni youth to fight against the U.S. supported Shiite government in Iraq; who are afraid of the Shiite power in Iran; who hate Israel; and use their grip on oil prices to control U.S. elections. We are arming Saudis who think the next war will involve them as Iraq is carved up between Turkey, Kurdistan, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia?

We are fighting Bush's Eternal War on Terror with weaponry supplied by the Bush administration against terrorists whipped to a frenzy by Bush foreign policies.

Al-Maliki on the edge

Will he be able to keep his job? Or is he already finished? Al-Maliki makes connections with Iran and Turkey:

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki met with officials in Iran on Wednesday to seek help in reining in violence in his country, reaching out to a nation the U.S. accuses of fueling Iraq's turmoil by backing Shiite militants.

It was al-Maliki's second visit to Tehran in less than a year, coming days after U.S. and Iranian experts held talks in Baghdad on improving Iraq's security.

Al-Maliki and the Shiite and Kurdish parties that dominate his government are closely linked to predominantly Shiite Iran, and he has struggled to balance those ties with the United States, Tehran's top rival in the region.

The U.S. has recently stepped up its allegations that Iran is arming Shiite militiamen, but the Iraqi government has taken a low-key stance without outright backing the American claims, which Tehran denies. One al-Maliki adviser, Sami al-Askari, said last month that the government "doesn't rule out" Iranian arming of militants.

[snip]
Before arriving in Iran, al-Maliki traveled to Turkey and agreed to root out a Kurdish rebel group operating from northern Iraq. But he said the Iraqi parliament would have the final say on efforts to halt the guerrillas' cross-border attacks into Turkey. Iran also faces problems with its Kurdish minority near the Iraqi border.

Turkey has threatened to stage an incursion into northern Iraq unless Iraq or the United States cracks down on rebels from the separatist Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, that have set up bases there. The envisaged counterterrorism agreement is aimed at forcing Iraq to officially commit itself to fighting the rebels.

Iraq, which like Iran is majority Shiite, has managed a difficult balancing act between Tehran and Washington since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, trying to maintain good relations with its powerful neighbor while not angering the Americans.

The U.S. has accused Iran of providing money and weapons to Shiite militias in Iraq. Iran denies the charges and argues that the presence of U.S. troops is destabilizing the region.

Washington and Tehran have held three rounds of talks on Iraqi security since May, and al-Maliki told AP he would push for these talks to continue at an ambassador level.

Looks like he's making every attempt to keep Iraq together but then:

... Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki - whose days in office are surely numbered - might want to to be remembered as the man who brought democracy and justice to Iraqis; the man who rooted out terrorism and killed al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Instead, Iraqis will remember Maliki as a selfish, sectarian politician who divided the country as never before, between Shi'ites and Sunnis. They will remember the death squads that flourished under his regime, the targeted assassinations of Sunni notables, and they will see him as a stooge of the Americans who was unable to fulfill any of the promises he made when coming to power in May 2006.
Maliki's problem is that his government is not constitutional, as his cabinet no longer represents all parties that are seated in Parliament. Thirteen out of 37 ministers have walked out, and more are likely to follow soon.

The first to abandon him were six Shi'ite ministers from the Sadrist bloc in April. They objected to his relationship with the United States, and his failure to secure a timetable for US troop withdrawal from Iraq. They were followed by Sunni Justice Minister Hashem al-Shibli from the Iraqi List that is headed by former prime minister Iyad Allawi.

This week, five Sunni ministers from the Iraqi Accordance Front stepped down, along with Sunni Salam al-Zoubai, who was deputy prime minister. They claimed this was because Maliki had not responded to any of the 11 demands they had made, which included greater decision-making for Sunnis, and a political amnesty for Sunni prisoners.

Then came the resignation of nine senior officers from the Iraqi Army, including Baker Zebari, the commander-in-chief. All of them were objecting to how the prime minister is running affairs.

After discussing the politicians who are jockeying for position to take al-Maliki's seat, the writer of this article, Sami Moubayed (a Syrian political analyst) goes on to say:

The pro-US Arab states have been very blunt in opposing Maliki, because of his relations with Iran and his well-known animosity toward Sunnis. Recently, they turned down an offer by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to support the Maliki cabinet.

[snip]

One cannot help but recall Maliki's first speech to the Iraqi people, broadcast in April 2006 when he was still prime minister-designate. He said, "Our Sunni brothers, by their participation in a broad alliance, have begun to carry responsibilities in the political process ... which will dry up the sources of terrorism. Fighting the insurgency will be my government's priority." He said he hoped to do so by creating "a white front" of Sunnis, Shi'ites and Kurds and that he would create a non-sectarian government to ward off accusations made by observers claiming that he was "too Shi'ite".

Maliki then addressed the Sunnis directly by playing down fears that Iran was interfering in Iraqi affairs. He thanked neighboring countries such as Iran for sheltering the Iraqi opposition during Saddam's era, saying, "But this does not mean any country can meddle in our affairs." Gratitude did not mean security interference, he added. Earlier, Maliki had said, "The weapons must be in the hands of the state. Their presence in the hands of others [militias] will be the start of problems that will trigger a civil war."

Rather than collect arms and root out militias, Maliki did the exact opposite. He will leave office amid a civil war - a very ugly one - that is largely due to his own doing.

The more Bush demands the 'Iraqi government' do something, the more it unravels. Heckovajob, Georgie!

Turkey is getting impatient

And is beginning to amass troops along the border of Iraq:

Baghdad, Iraq (AHN)-Officials in Iraq are accusing neighboring Turkey of massing some 140,000 soldiers on its northern Iraq border, bringing the number of Turkish troops close to the 155,000 U.S. soldiers that are stationed throughout the country.

Turkey, which has accused the U.S. of inaction against Kurdish separatist rebels in the north, has been battling insurgent PKK Kurdish guerrillas since 1984, in a war which has taken an estimated 30,000 lives.

Oh good, just what we need. Another swimmer into the bloodbath that is Iraq. C'mon in, the water's fine.

Checkup on our friends in the Middle East and Asia

China?

May 28, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- A new annual report on China's arms development, issued by the U.S. Defense Department, says China is progressing with the development of long-range weapons that include guided missiles and new nuclear submarines.
The Pentagon's report suggests the nature of China's armed forces is changing rapidly away from local self-defense toward strategic capabilities.

Beijing rejects criticism that the modernization is aimed at increasing China's weight across the region, and says the impressive array of weaponry is purely for defensive purposes.

Pakistan?:

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, June 19 Hundreds of police from Pakistan's Punjab province went on a rampage against their Islamabad counterparts Tuesday to protest the death of a fellow officer.

About 1,000 Punjabis had been brought to the capital last week as reinforcements for a crackdown on radical militant clerics demanding the imposition of Islamic Sharia law and their madrassa school students, the Press Trust of India reported.

During the operations, a Punjabi officer was injured and later died, and his fellow officers claim the Islamabad police force did nothing to help him, the report said.

Several hundred of the 1,000 visiting officers went on a rampage, throwing stones and burning tires, and some chanted slogans from the madrassas they had come to raid, PTI said. Several Islamabad police officers were also beaten in the protest.

I'm sure Pervez Musharaf is on it:

Pakistan might be in the midst of its first televised revolution. For nearly three months, a handful of fledgling independent stations have been broadcasting minute-by-minute coverage of what at first seemed a relatively obscure issue: the suspension of Pakistan's chief judge by the president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf.

Since then, Pakistanis nationwide have been transfixed by live coverage of police beating lawyers, pro-Musharraf groups firing assault rifles at demonstrators and the chief justice speaking to ever-larger and more boisterous audiences about the dangers of autocratic rule.

As the cameras have rolled, opposition to Musharraf has surged, and he is considered more vulnerable now than at any time in his eight years in office. Even in rural areas where poverty is high, residents have gathered in hotels and barbershops around the few television sets available and watched the brewing crisis play out live.

Well... Musharraf has his hands full, how about Turkey?:

In Turkey, the military and the government are engaged in an all-out struggle for power. The country is deeply divided, and decidedly unstable. Turkish writer Ahmet Altan describes his country's paradoxes and warns of the potentially dire consequences.

This writer ends up warning us:

If there is a coup in Turkey, the world would encounter a phenomenon it has never seen before. Subsequent to a coup, Turkey would seek a partnership with Russia and Iran and would obtain its weapons, energy and funding from these two countries. The natural gas, oil and nuclear power from Russia and Iran would suffice to keep Turkey on its feet, if only for a while.

But a block made up of Russia, Turkey and Iran could change the global balance. It would take complete control of the Middle East. It would imprison Europe within the borders of its small continent. It would draw the Caucasus, Afghanistan, and Pakistan under its sway. It would form close relations with the Muslim world. It would dominate the sources of oil. It would also likely form a partnership with China.

This is the divide between the secular and the religious factions of the country. We can still count on them to help us with Iraq, right?

WASHINGTON, June 19 (UPI) -- U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told her Iraqi counterpart his government needed to clamp down on Kurdish rebels who are attacking Turkey.

In the meeting Monday between Rice and Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari in Washington, Rice said she discussed the escalating situation in northern Iraq that has led Turkey to mass troops along the border.

"We discussed the importance of the trilateral security mechanism that Iraq, the United States and Turkey instituted some time ago, and the importance of accelerating the work of the mechanism, because the Iraqis do not want -- and we do not want -- their territory to be used for terrorist acts against their neighbor," Rice said.

A militant Kurdish group known as the PKK wants autonomy for Kurds in northern Iraq and southeastern Turkey. The group has been mounting increased attacks on Turkish military targets and engaged troops in firefights, Voice of America said.

Well.... that won't happen, right? On to Afhanistan:

KABUL (Reuters) - A Taliban bomber blew up a police bus in the heart of Kabul on Sunday, killing 24 people in one of the deadliest suicide strikes to hit Afghanistan since the Taliban were ousted in 2001.

The blast tore apart the bus, wounding dozens of bystanders, wrecking several other vehicles and scattering body parts. It was the fifth suicide attack in three days in the country, suggesting an escalation in use of the tactic.

[snip]

"It was a very, very successful suicide attack," a Taliban commander, Mullah Hayatullah Khan, told Reuters by satellite phone. "We have plans for more successful attacks in future."

The Taliban and their al Qaeda allies have adopted the tactics of Iraq's insurgency to try to dispel the notion that government and foreign forces are in control of the country.

Er...quick! Uzbekistan:

...the overall stability of the country is at a high level. Despite the latent discontent with the economic situation, the country is set to remain on a stable course. The Uzbek government will most probably continue its tough stance on human rights activists, notwithstanding western pressure. On the international scene, the diversification of relations, especially towards Asia and countries of the Middle East, can be expected to continue. It remains to be seen how far the mentioned disagreements with Russia will harm bilateral relations.

So the farmers are unhappy and they're pissed at the Russians. They don't like us much either. Oh well, next! How about Kyrgyzstan? I mean Kazakhstan:

ALMATY (Reuters) - President Nursultan Nazarbayev has styled himself a firm but modern Khan in his 17 years in power in Kazakhstan, but critics say his authoritarian rule brooks no opposition and borders on a personality cult.

Showing a firm resolve to stay in control, the 66-year-old former steelworker signed constitutional amendments on May 22 that allow him to stay in office for life.

His opponents, some at home, some in exile, accuse him of usurping power, backtracking on democracy and appointing allies and family members to key positions.

But the leader of this major oil-producing nation on the Caspian Sea has insisted that Kazakhstan has its own vision of development, which differs from that of the West.

"We should not ... run after every foreign recommendation," Nazarbayev said at the end of last year. "We should not blindly copy foreign schemes."

Foreign schemes? I think they're on to us. It seems there may be some trouble with the oil workers there too:

...while the tension between Kazakh workers and foreign sub-contractors in the region has yet to be exploited by the nascent political class in Kazakhstan, it is a populist issue that could benefit various political forces in the country, especially in the context of the country’s quiet intra-elite competition for the right to take over the reigns once President Nazarbayev steps down. If such political forces begin to look to workers in western Kazakhstan for support, that could spell even more troubles for the various foreign oil companies active in the west of the country.

How weird. A country thinking they might get to keep their own oil resources... and there does seem to be some current trouble with the rulers going on...

How are we with Kyrgyzstan?:

With Kyrgyzstan’s most powerful political actors speaking in favor of Russia, public anger against the U.S. presence in Kyrgyzstan is likely to resume soon. Today, only a few Kyrgyz public figures dare to look at the U.S. military base as a positive development in the country. Most consider Russia to be Bishkek’s key economic and political partner. However, few Kyrgyz realize that the economic influence of China and Kazakhstan is soaring and at time exceeds that of Russia’s.

They like Russia, may like China even more, and everybody way more than the U.S.? Hmmm. So, what about Tadzhikistan ... I mean Tajikistan? Looks like really good bridges are being built there. That should make them happy:

Several years ago Aga Khan Development Network initiated construction of three bridges across Panj River. One was built in Tem district in Khorog - replacing the old ferry, the other was built in Darwaz and the last was built in Ishkashim - replacing the old one built during the Soviet-Afghan war. All three bridges were constructed with the same purpose as the one constructed in Nizhni Pyanj – at smaller scale promotion of trade and commerce between Tajikistan and Afghanistan and at larger scale promotion of regional integration.

No matter how good these bridges are in economic terms, it seems that the government of Tajikistan is not passionate to use them at full capacity. There is a serious concern that bridges will increase not only trade but also the inflow of narcotics. Yesterday, president Emomali Rahmon blamed NATO and US in not struggling against the production of narcotics in Afghanistan. According to Rahmon every time he tried to tell the representatives of NATO and US about his concerns, they always said in response that struggle against narcotics is not part of their mission in Afghanistan.

They seem to be having a bit of a problem, too:

On Saturday all the world information agencies reported on explosions in Dushanbe outside Tajikistan’s Supreme Court, which is located in the protected area. The explosions did not injure anyone but smashed the windows of the nearby buildings. It was probably the third fact in the series of explosions near the administrative buildings which took place in Dushanbe in last three years.

Turkmenistan?

Were Turkmenistan not home to one of the world's largest reserves of oil and gas and one of modern history's most peculiar former dictators, a presidential election (ElectionGuide.org) would probably pass unnoticed (NYT), like the proverbial tree falling in the wood. But energy analysts say political change in this oil-rich country along the Caspian Sea has important foreign policy ramifications for the United States, Russia, and others in the region. Saparmurat Niyazov, Turkmenistan's previous president, ruled with a Stalin-like iron fist to sustain his personality cult: He erected ornate ice palaces in his honor and renamed the month of January (Atlantic) after himself. But his successor, Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, is no democrat either. A former dentist and deputy prime minister, he has called democracy a “tender substance” that cannot be imported (RFE/RL) from outside and has promised to keep Turkmenistan on the path set out by his predecessor. In fifteen years of independence, he boasts, Turkmenistan, unlike most of its post-Soviet neighbors, has experienced “no economic or political shocks."

The tradeoff of such relative stability, however, has been a repressive police state with little regard for human rights or religious freedoms (AP). Political opponents and independent journalists are routinely harassed or jailed. Turkmenistan annually ranks near the bottom of Transparency International's corruption index. And Freedom House has slammed the country for restricting social freedoms, such as banning long hair or beards for men.

Why should we care whether these countries rise or fall? They are far away and don't involve us, right?

Wrong. Get to know these names. These are the countries in the center of the world power struggle and oil grab between China, Russia, and the United States.

These lands are where the next wars will be.

It was just a freeway kinda hot pursuit, not an invasion

Turkey invades Iraq... or not:

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) -- Several thousand Turkish troops crossed into northern Iraq early Wednesday to chase Kurdish guerrillas who attack Turkey from bases there, two Turkish security officials said. Turkey's foreign minister denied its troops had entered Iraq.

Two senior security officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media, characterized the action as a limited "hot pursuit" raid. They told The Associated Press it did not constitute the kind of large incursion that Turkish leaders have been discussing in recent weeks as Turkish troops built up their force along the border.

One official said the troops went less than two miles inside Iraq and were still there in late afternoon. "It is a hot pursuit, not an incursion," one official said.

Another official said by telephone it was "not a major offensive and the number of troops is not in the tens of thousands." He also said the Turkish troops went into a remote, mountainous area.

The officials are based in southeast Turkey, where the military has been battling separatist Kurdish rebels since they took up arms in 1984.

The officials stood by their statement despite denials from Turkish and Iraqi officials.

And here we go....

Into the wild blue quagmire of all quagmires:
Via Attaturk of Rising Hegemon, the Kurds have fired on Turkey:

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) - Kurdish rebels fired rockets and grenades at a Turkish military outpost Monday, killing seven soldiers in an attack that heightened tension at a time when Ankara has threatened military action against the rebels in northern Iraq.

The army sent helicopter gunships and reinforcements to Tunceli province in southeastern Turkey after guerrillas rammed a vehicle into the military post and opened fire with automatic weapons and rockets, local media reported.

Soldiers returned fire, killing the driver, the military said.

The attack came as Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul told European Union officials visiting Ankara that ``we have every right to take measures against terrorist activities directed at us from northern Iraq.''

Turkey's political and military leaders have been debating whether to stage an incursion into northern Iraq to try to root out Kurdish rebel bases there.

I told you and I told you....