U.S. Ready to Say Goodbye to Turkey
- Comments - 08 June 2017, 18:14
- Comments - 08 June 2017, 18:14
- Comments - 08 June 2017, 18:14
- Comments - 08 June 2017, 18:14
U.S. Ready to Say Goodbye to Turkey
-
- Comments - 08 June 2017, 18:14
The war in Iraq in 2003, despite the geopolitical disguise, had an
overtly geopolitical nature because Iraq was supposed to become a global
storage of oil with a view to critical times which was needed for
achievement of the manageable thermonuclear reaction. Later on
the “central government” in Baghdad tried to secure its country’s
sovereignty, and it was not clear whether pan-Arab or nevertheless
Shiite ambitions were expressed. One way or another, the leading
powers of the West tried to create an oil source under the control of
the Kurds in the north of Iraq, independent from OPEC and the Turkish
roads and the Gulf of Ormuz in case South Iraq where the greater part of
the Iraqi oil is concentrated comes out of control. The game of
involvement of Turkey in the military conflict with the “central
government” of Iraq was related to this. For its part Turkey
made it clear to NATO and the United States that if involved in military
conflicts it will demand their participation in specific defense
assistance. Turkey is using the developments in Syria to clarify
relations with NATO and the United States. The thesis that
Turkey’s stance has become an important crisis factor in NATO has become
“legitimate” in the international political discourse. Turkey
has, nevertheless, been involved in the “Vietnam” between Tigris and
Euphrates which it was cautiously avoiding because the main purpose was
to redraw the borders of the region, including Turkey. But how can the
creation of the oil “barrel” be combined with the Turkish “Vietnam”.
Can the “barrel” wait? At least, Turkey warns NATO and the United
States that if there is a need for war, they will participate too. In
other words, “Vietnam” will be for everyone. Will this scare the
West? NATO’s full participation is possible under the relevant
arguments and grounds in line with the NATO Charter. In the past
few years in the United States there have been no arguments over the
expediency of Turkey’s membership to NATO. The Americans are trying to
say goodbye to the idea of Turkey’s membership to NATO. The Americans do
not need Turkey in NATO, and the experts of Pentagon’s think tanks are
talking about this openly. The United States will agree if
Turkey voluntarily leaves NATO. This idea has been put forth
consistently, and one may say that it occurred with regard to Turkey
quite quickly, already during Trump’s office. The contacts
between Trump and Erdogan have had nothing in common with the political
issues. Rather superficial relations with hostile elements have been
created between the United States and Turkey. The mediation factors –
Israel, the Islamic factor, the pan-Turkic context – have no importance
at all. Currently it is too early to talk about the possible
exit of Turkey from NATO, this idea is not mature even in Turkey.
However, the United States is ready to say goodbye to Turkey.
The United States understands that Turkey’s exit from NATO is an actual
issue, and the Americans would feel far more comfortable without it. The
issue is the Black Sea – Caucasus and the Near Eastern regions where
the United States needs to have new partners and military bases.
The United States is ready to coordinate these problems with the
Europeans, which is noticed in the behavior of Germany and France.
The
war in Iraq in 2003, despite the geopolitical disguise, had an overtly
geopolitical nature because Iraq was supposed to become a global storage
of oil with a view to critical times which was needed for achievement
of the manageable thermonuclear reaction. Later on the “central
government” in Baghdad tried to secure its country’s sovereignty, and it
was not clear whether pan-Arab or nevertheless Shiite ambitions were
expressed. One way or another, the leading powers of the West
tried to create an oil source under the control of the Kurds in the
north of Iraq, independent from OPEC and the Turkish roads and the Gulf
of Ormuz in case South Iraq where the greater part of the Iraqi oil is
concentrated comes out of control. The game of involvement of Turkey in
the military conflict with the “central government” of Iraq was related
to this. For its part Turkey made it clear to NATO and the
United States that if involved in military conflicts it will demand
their participation in specific defense assistance. Turkey is using the
developments in Syria to clarify relations with NATO and the United
States. The thesis that Turkey’s stance has become an important
crisis factor in NATO has become “legitimate” in the international
political discourse. Turkey has, nevertheless, been involved in
the “Vietnam” between Tigris and Euphrates which it was cautiously
avoiding because the main purpose was to redraw the borders of the
region, including Turkey. But how can the creation of the oil “barrel”
be combined with the Turkish “Vietnam”. Can the “barrel” wait?
At least, Turkey warns NATO and the United States that if there is a
need for war, they will participate too. In other words, “Vietnam” will
be for everyone. Will this scare the West? NATO’s full
participation is possible under the relevant arguments and grounds in
line with the NATO Charter. In the past few years in the United
States there have been no arguments over the expediency of Turkey’s
membership to NATO. The Americans are trying to say goodbye to the idea
of Turkey’s membership to NATO. The Americans do not need Turkey in
NATO, and the experts of Pentagon’s think tanks are talking about this
openly. The United States will agree if Turkey voluntarily
leaves NATO. This idea has been put forth consistently, and one may say
that it occurred with regard to Turkey quite quickly, already during
Trump’s office. The contacts between Trump and Erdogan have had
nothing in common with the political issues. Rather superficial
relations with hostile elements have been created between the United
States and Turkey. The mediation factors – Israel, the Islamic factor,
the pan-Turkic context – have no importance at all. Currently
it is too early to talk about the possible exit of Turkey from NATO,
this idea is not mature even in Turkey. However, the United States is
ready to say goodbye to Turkey. The United States understands
that Turkey’s exit from NATO is an actual issue, and the Americans would
feel far more comfortable without it. The issue is the Black Sea –
Caucasus and the Near Eastern regions where the United States needs to
have new partners and military bases. The United States is ready
to coordinate these problems with the Europeans, which is noticed in
the behavior of Germany and France.
U.S. Ready to Say Goodbye to Turkey
-
- Comments - 08 June 2017, 18:14
The war in Iraq in 2003, despite the geopolitical disguise, had an
overtly geopolitical nature because Iraq was supposed to become a global
storage of oil with a view to critical times which was needed for
achievement of the manageable thermonuclear reaction. Later on
the “central government” in Baghdad tried to secure its country’s
sovereignty, and it was not clear whether pan-Arab or nevertheless
Shiite ambitions were expressed. One way or another, the leading
powers of the West tried to create an oil source under the control of
the Kurds in the north of Iraq, independent from OPEC and the Turkish
roads and the Gulf of Ormuz in case South Iraq where the greater part of
the Iraqi oil is concentrated comes out of control. The game of
involvement of Turkey in the military conflict with the “central
government” of Iraq was related to this. For its part Turkey
made it clear to NATO and the United States that if involved in military
conflicts it will demand their participation in specific defense
assistance. Turkey is using the developments in Syria to clarify
relations with NATO and the United States. The thesis that
Turkey’s stance has become an important crisis factor in NATO has become
“legitimate” in the international political discourse. Turkey
has, nevertheless, been involved in the “Vietnam” between Tigris and
Euphrates which it was cautiously avoiding because the main purpose was
to redraw the borders of the region, including Turkey. But how can the
creation of the oil “barrel” be combined with the Turkish “Vietnam”.
Can the “barrel” wait? At least, Turkey warns NATO and the United
States that if there is a need for war, they will participate too. In
other words, “Vietnam” will be for everyone. Will this scare the
West? NATO’s full participation is possible under the relevant
arguments and grounds in line with the NATO Charter. In the past
few years in the United States there have been no arguments over the
expediency of Turkey’s membership to NATO. The Americans are trying to
say goodbye to the idea of Turkey’s membership to NATO. The Americans do
not need Turkey in NATO, and the experts of Pentagon’s think tanks are
talking about this openly. The United States will agree if
Turkey voluntarily leaves NATO. This idea has been put forth
consistently, and one may say that it occurred with regard to Turkey
quite quickly, already during Trump’s office. The contacts
between Trump and Erdogan have had nothing in common with the political
issues. Rather superficial relations with hostile elements have been
created between the United States and Turkey. The mediation factors –
Israel, the Islamic factor, the pan-Turkic context – have no importance
at all. Currently it is too early to talk about the possible
exit of Turkey from NATO, this idea is not mature even in Turkey.
However, the United States is ready to say goodbye to Turkey.
The United States understands that Turkey’s exit from NATO is an actual
issue, and the Americans would feel far more comfortable without it. The
issue is the Black Sea – Caucasus and the Near Eastern regions where
the United States needs to have new partners and military bases.
The United States is ready to coordinate these problems with the
Europeans, which is noticed in the behavior of Germany and France.
No comments:
Post a Comment