EUROPE NEWS
OCTOBER 27, 2010
By MARC CHAMPION
ISTANBUL—Turkey's top security body is set to discuss Wednesday whether to back a U.S.-led plan to build a missile-defense shield against rogue states—a moment that could force Ankara to choose between its longstanding westward orientation and its recent courtship of Iran.
The National Security Council, which consists of top military commanders and political leaders, is expected to debate the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's proposal for a defense shield largely built and funded by the U.S. A senior Turkish diplomat said Ankara will have to decide its position before next month's summit of the 28-nation alliance in Lisbon, Portugal, where Turkey and other NATO members are due to decide whether to go ahead with the plan.
For most NATO members, the shield is an insurance policy against a potential missile threat from Iran. It is also a welcome compromise from the much more ambitious plan of the previous Bush administration. That proposal, which would have installed antiballistic missiles in Poland and a forward radar system in the Czech Republic, triggered a fierce backlash from Moscow.
For Turkey, however, the Obama administration's scaled-back plan is proving a major diplomatic headache that risks forcing Ankara to choose between NATO and Iran. It is also triggering a fierce debate inside the country over where Turkey's core interests lie. In recent days, Turkey's religious conservative and pro-government media have argued that siding with NATO against Iran would end Turkey's effort to build an independent foreign policy and damage its credibility in the Middle East.
Both U.S. and Turkish leaders say no decision has yet been made as to which countries will host the system. Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey are in the picture, according to diplomats familiar with the matter. But Turkey, which shares a border with Iran, is the location of choice for the plan's forward radar, according to military analysts and diplomats.
Turkish leaders have so far remained noncommittal and have asked Washington for assurances and technical details. According to diplomats familiar with the matter, Turkey is asking that NATO not name any specific country as the source of a missile-attack threat. It also seeks to ensure that all of Turkey's territory is covered by the system and that Turkey has access to all data and a measure of control over the decision to fire. These people say Ankara also wants guarantees that non-NATO members, specifically Israel, wouldn't gain access to the data.
"No decisions have been made yet," said the senior Turkish diplomat. "We don't know exactly how this system will be formed, what will be the command and control structure, the threat perception and other issues. So that's why our talks are continuing."
Some of the Turkish requests shouldn't be problematic, said one non-Turkish diplomat familiar with the matter. Command and control of the system would have to be at an operational, not political, level, due to the short time frame available to shoot a missile down. Turkey would therefore have a say—and a potential veto—in setting the rules of engagement. Similarly, other countries, as well as Turkey, are concerned that data should be available only to NATO members, the diplomat said.
"If Iran is not mentioned by name and the shield covers Turkey in its entirety then I think [Turkey's government] will go along with it," said Soli Ozel, a prominent newspaper columnist on international affairs and professor at Bilgi University in Istanbul. "If those conditions are fulfilled and the government still refuses, then all these discussions about Turkey's direction will come back with a vengeance."
Turkey's military wants the shield, according to Huseyin Bagci, professor of international relations at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara. "[Iranian] Sahab missiles can reach any part of Turkey," he said, adding that militaries focus on the capabilities of potential foes, not their intentions.
Indeed, Turkey has a plan of its own to purchase a missile system to protect its borders. Raytheon Co., maker of the Patriot missile, is one of the bidders and earlier this month announced a deal to subcontract part of the Patriot system's manufacture to Turkey's largest arms maker, Aselsan Elektronik Sanayi ve Ticaret AS.
The National Security Council, which consists of top military commanders and political leaders, is expected to debate the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's proposal for a defense shield largely built and funded by the U.S. A senior Turkish diplomat said Ankara will have to decide its position before next month's summit of the 28-nation alliance in Lisbon, Portugal, where Turkey and other NATO members are due to decide whether to go ahead with the plan.
For most NATO members, the shield is an insurance policy against a potential missile threat from Iran. It is also a welcome compromise from the much more ambitious plan of the previous Bush administration. That proposal, which would have installed antiballistic missiles in Poland and a forward radar system in the Czech Republic, triggered a fierce backlash from Moscow.
For Turkey, however, the Obama administration's scaled-back plan is proving a major diplomatic headache that risks forcing Ankara to choose between NATO and Iran. It is also triggering a fierce debate inside the country over where Turkey's core interests lie. In recent days, Turkey's religious conservative and pro-government media have argued that siding with NATO against Iran would end Turkey's effort to build an independent foreign policy and damage its credibility in the Middle East.
Both U.S. and Turkish leaders say no decision has yet been made as to which countries will host the system. Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey are in the picture, according to diplomats familiar with the matter. But Turkey, which shares a border with Iran, is the location of choice for the plan's forward radar, according to military analysts and diplomats.
Turkish leaders have so far remained noncommittal and have asked Washington for assurances and technical details. According to diplomats familiar with the matter, Turkey is asking that NATO not name any specific country as the source of a missile-attack threat. It also seeks to ensure that all of Turkey's territory is covered by the system and that Turkey has access to all data and a measure of control over the decision to fire. These people say Ankara also wants guarantees that non-NATO members, specifically Israel, wouldn't gain access to the data.
"No decisions have been made yet," said the senior Turkish diplomat. "We don't know exactly how this system will be formed, what will be the command and control structure, the threat perception and other issues. So that's why our talks are continuing."
Some of the Turkish requests shouldn't be problematic, said one non-Turkish diplomat familiar with the matter. Command and control of the system would have to be at an operational, not political, level, due to the short time frame available to shoot a missile down. Turkey would therefore have a say—and a potential veto—in setting the rules of engagement. Similarly, other countries, as well as Turkey, are concerned that data should be available only to NATO members, the diplomat said.
"If Iran is not mentioned by name and the shield covers Turkey in its entirety then I think [Turkey's government] will go along with it," said Soli Ozel, a prominent newspaper columnist on international affairs and professor at Bilgi University in Istanbul. "If those conditions are fulfilled and the government still refuses, then all these discussions about Turkey's direction will come back with a vengeance."
Turkey's military wants the shield, according to Huseyin Bagci, professor of international relations at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara. "[Iranian] Sahab missiles can reach any part of Turkey," he said, adding that militaries focus on the capabilities of potential foes, not their intentions.
Indeed, Turkey has a plan of its own to purchase a missile system to protect its borders. Raytheon Co., maker of the Patriot missile, is one of the bidders and earlier this month announced a deal to subcontract part of the Patriot system's manufacture to Turkey's largest arms maker, Aselsan Elektronik Sanayi ve Ticaret AS.
Yet Turkish diplomats are concerned that positioning a NATO missile system on Iran's border would infuriate Iran, a country that supplies about a third of Turkey's energy and which Ankara has worked hard to court, presenting itself as a neutral party in the international dispute over Tehran's nuclear fuel program. A NATO shield also would also cut across the grain of Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu's frequent statements that Turkey doesn't believe it is threatened by any of its neighbors.
Write to Marc Champion at marc.champion@wsj.com
wall street journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303891804575576233454738208.html
OCTOBER 27, 2010
By MARC CHAMPION
ISTANBUL—Turkey's top security body is set to discuss Wednesday whether to back a U.S.-led plan to build a missile-defense shield against rogue states—a moment that could force Ankara to choose between its longstanding westward orientation and its recent courtship of Iran.
The National Security Council, which consists of top military commanders and political leaders, is expected to debate the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's proposal for a defense shield largely built and funded by the U.S. A senior Turkish diplomat said Ankara will have to decide its position before next month's summit of the 28-nation alliance in Lisbon, Portugal, where Turkey and other NATO members are due to decide whether to go ahead with the plan.
For most NATO members, the shield is an insurance policy against a potential missile threat from Iran. It is also a welcome compromise from the much more ambitious plan of the previous Bush administration. That proposal, which would have installed antiballistic missiles in Poland and a forward radar system in the Czech Republic, triggered a fierce backlash from Moscow.
For Turkey, however, the Obama administration's scaled-back plan is proving a major diplomatic headache that risks forcing Ankara to choose between NATO and Iran. It is also triggering a fierce debate inside the country over where Turkey's core interests lie. In recent days, Turkey's religious conservative and pro-government media have argued that siding with NATO against Iran would end Turkey's effort to build an independent foreign policy and damage its credibility in the Middle East.
Both U.S. and Turkish leaders say no decision has yet been made as to which countries will host the system. Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey are in the picture, according to diplomats familiar with the matter. But Turkey, which shares a border with Iran, is the location of choice for the plan's forward radar, according to military analysts and diplomats.
Turkish leaders have so far remained noncommittal and have asked Washington for assurances and technical details. According to diplomats familiar with the matter, Turkey is asking that NATO not name any specific country as the source of a missile-attack threat. It also seeks to ensure that all of Turkey's territory is covered by the system and that Turkey has access to all data and a measure of control over the decision to fire. These people say Ankara also wants guarantees that non-NATO members, specifically Israel, wouldn't gain access to the data.
"No decisions have been made yet," said the senior Turkish diplomat. "We don't know exactly how this system will be formed, what will be the command and control structure, the threat perception and other issues. So that's why our talks are continuing."
Some of the Turkish requests shouldn't be problematic, said one non-Turkish diplomat familiar with the matter. Command and control of the system would have to be at an operational, not political, level, due to the short time frame available to shoot a missile down. Turkey would therefore have a say—and a potential veto—in setting the rules of engagement. Similarly, other countries, as well as Turkey, are concerned that data should be available only to NATO members, the diplomat said.
"If Iran is not mentioned by name and the shield covers Turkey in its entirety then I think [Turkey's government] will go along with it," said Soli Ozel, a prominent newspaper columnist on international affairs and professor at Bilgi University in Istanbul. "If those conditions are fulfilled and the government still refuses, then all these discussions about Turkey's direction will come back with a vengeance."
Turkey's military wants the shield, according to Huseyin Bagci, professor of international relations at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara. "[Iranian] Sahab missiles can reach any part of Turkey," he said, adding that militaries focus on the capabilities of potential foes, not their intentions.
Indeed, Turkey has a plan of its own to purchase a missile system to protect its borders. Raytheon Co., maker of the Patriot missile, is one of the bidders and earlier this month announced a deal to subcontract part of the Patriot system's manufacture to Turkey's largest arms maker, Aselsan Elektronik Sanayi ve Ticaret AS.
The National Security Council, which consists of top military commanders and political leaders, is expected to debate the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's proposal for a defense shield largely built and funded by the U.S. A senior Turkish diplomat said Ankara will have to decide its position before next month's summit of the 28-nation alliance in Lisbon, Portugal, where Turkey and other NATO members are due to decide whether to go ahead with the plan.
For most NATO members, the shield is an insurance policy against a potential missile threat from Iran. It is also a welcome compromise from the much more ambitious plan of the previous Bush administration. That proposal, which would have installed antiballistic missiles in Poland and a forward radar system in the Czech Republic, triggered a fierce backlash from Moscow.
For Turkey, however, the Obama administration's scaled-back plan is proving a major diplomatic headache that risks forcing Ankara to choose between NATO and Iran. It is also triggering a fierce debate inside the country over where Turkey's core interests lie. In recent days, Turkey's religious conservative and pro-government media have argued that siding with NATO against Iran would end Turkey's effort to build an independent foreign policy and damage its credibility in the Middle East.
Both U.S. and Turkish leaders say no decision has yet been made as to which countries will host the system. Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey are in the picture, according to diplomats familiar with the matter. But Turkey, which shares a border with Iran, is the location of choice for the plan's forward radar, according to military analysts and diplomats.
Turkish leaders have so far remained noncommittal and have asked Washington for assurances and technical details. According to diplomats familiar with the matter, Turkey is asking that NATO not name any specific country as the source of a missile-attack threat. It also seeks to ensure that all of Turkey's territory is covered by the system and that Turkey has access to all data and a measure of control over the decision to fire. These people say Ankara also wants guarantees that non-NATO members, specifically Israel, wouldn't gain access to the data.
"No decisions have been made yet," said the senior Turkish diplomat. "We don't know exactly how this system will be formed, what will be the command and control structure, the threat perception and other issues. So that's why our talks are continuing."
Some of the Turkish requests shouldn't be problematic, said one non-Turkish diplomat familiar with the matter. Command and control of the system would have to be at an operational, not political, level, due to the short time frame available to shoot a missile down. Turkey would therefore have a say—and a potential veto—in setting the rules of engagement. Similarly, other countries, as well as Turkey, are concerned that data should be available only to NATO members, the diplomat said.
"If Iran is not mentioned by name and the shield covers Turkey in its entirety then I think [Turkey's government] will go along with it," said Soli Ozel, a prominent newspaper columnist on international affairs and professor at Bilgi University in Istanbul. "If those conditions are fulfilled and the government still refuses, then all these discussions about Turkey's direction will come back with a vengeance."
Turkey's military wants the shield, according to Huseyin Bagci, professor of international relations at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara. "[Iranian] Sahab missiles can reach any part of Turkey," he said, adding that militaries focus on the capabilities of potential foes, not their intentions.
Indeed, Turkey has a plan of its own to purchase a missile system to protect its borders. Raytheon Co., maker of the Patriot missile, is one of the bidders and earlier this month announced a deal to subcontract part of the Patriot system's manufacture to Turkey's largest arms maker, Aselsan Elektronik Sanayi ve Ticaret AS.
Yet Turkish diplomats are concerned that positioning a NATO missile system on Iran's border would infuriate Iran, a country that supplies about a third of Turkey's energy and which Ankara has worked hard to court, presenting itself as a neutral party in the international dispute over Tehran's nuclear fuel program. A NATO shield also would also cut across the grain of Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu's frequent statements that Turkey doesn't believe it is threatened by any of its neighbors.
Write to Marc Champion at marc.champion@wsj.com
wall street journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303891804575576233454738208.html
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου