[updated:LAST EDITED ON 10-02-03 AT 07:39 AM (GMT)]Split looms for Nato over Iraq
Turkey occupies a key place in US war plans
Nato faces a crisis on Monday over contingency plans for fighting a war with Iraq.
It is inexcusable on the part of those countries
Colin Powell
US Secretary of State
One or more members strongly opposed to war with Iraq appear almost certain to block a US request to beef-up fellow member Turkey’s defences.
Under the alliance’s “silent procedure” the request will go through if no member formally objects by Monday’s deadline of 0900 GMT – but Belgium has said it will use its veto, possibly with French support.
Top US officials have said that such a move would be “shameful” and “inexcusable”.
The BBC’s correspondent in Brussels, Stephen Sackur, says that the rift between the US and what Mr Rumsfeld has called “old Europe” threatens to do lasting damage to Nato solidarity.
US request
“We are going to block it [the US request] between now and Monday – it is settled,” Belgian Foreign Minister Louis Michel said on Sunday.
He was speaking after a bruising weekend of talks between US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Western European allies.
Mr Michel added: “When one has to take a slap in the face such as the insulting remarks… by Mr Rumsfeld who comes to teach a thing or two to ‘old Europe’ – the Europe of democratic values, humanist Europe, the Europe of the Age of Enlightenment – personally I find that this hurts.”
Belgium, France and Germany have been objecting to the US request to help Turkey – which shares a border with Iraq – for three weeks.
The military package for Turkey, requested by Washington on 15 January, includes:
Patriot anti-missile batteries
Awacs surveillance planes
Chemical and biological protection units
‘Peace undermined’
While Germany appeared to indicate at the weekend that it might relent, France seems to be maintaining its opposition along with Belgium.
The three states argue that making preparations to defend Turkey could undermine diplomatic efforts to avert war.
At the same time, France and Germany have mooted a new plan of their own for resolving the Iraq crisis peacefully, by boosting UN weapons inspectors already on the ground there.
Their proposals have been backed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
If a veto is lodged on Monday, Turkey could respond by invoking Article Four of Nato’s founding treaty, which calls on the alliance to consult whenever a member state feels its territory is threatened.
Correspondents say the move would be unprecedented.
Correspondents say Turkey could also by-pass Nato as a body and seek the support of individual members. Diplomats say this would spell the collapse of the alliance.
‘Shameful’
US Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Sunday that he could not understand how any of Nato’s 19 members would veto support for Turkey.
“I think it is inexcusable on the part of those countries and I hope they will think differently by the time they have to make a judgment tomorrow,” he told America’s Fox News.
His indignation was echoed by Mr Rumsfeld in an interview for Italy’s La Repubblica newspaper.
“For me it’s truly shameful,” he was quoted as saying. “Turkey is an ally. An ally that is risking everything… How can you refuse it help?”
The stage is set for a furious behind-the-scenes row at Nato headquarters, our correspondent says.
————————
I only hope after this we can restore unity back in Europe. Frankly I don`t give a sh/t anymore about NATO. Maybe it`s time to disband it, cause it`s only used to justify America`s unjust politics. Screw NATO. If Europe should place troops, than maybe on the Greek-Turkish border, to prevent those million Turks (illegal immigrants) fleeing into the EU every year. Or in Cyprus, once it joins the EU. I`ve always been a very moderate guy, but that does it. I`m sick of having to hear Rumsfeld threatening us. All the gov`ts that support the US now, Aznar, Blair and Berlusconi, will be punished next elections. And Poland, Czech Rep. and Hungary, well I think we should delay their membership to the EU for some more years (if not for ever). They clearly don`t understand yet what common foreign policy is. These countries knock on our doors to beg for money, but no political will whatsoever to join a common policy.
What about a new nato, the US + Turkey + and those other Eastern-European semi-democracies like Romania and Bulgaria. Rumsfeld can stick his new Europe down his arse. Maybe he can have some gov`ts behind him, the people clearly opposed America`s war plans. If this war turns out to be a huge disaster, guess who will be punished for this.
By: Arabella-Cox - 15th February 2003 at 12:09
RE: Peace Protestors
“If Saddam is let off the hook there could be whole lotta troubles with all kinda other rogue nations trying to tweek the lion’s tail.”
What hook? His crime was the invasion of Kuwaite. He was driven out and has been the subject of sanction for over 10 years. Is that not punnishment enough?
“Given French record in Africa & Mid-East,…”
The English record and the US record in Africa and the Mid East is not better.
US concerns about the plight of the Iraqi people can be compared with those of the French.
I don’t see the connection between Saddam and “far greater bloodshed around the world.”
If brutal military force is the answer, why wasn’t it the answer for the Soviets or the British in Afghanistan or for the Americans in Vietnam or the UN in Korea.
Why isn’t it the answer in North Korea?
Surely the criminal trial and bombing campaign in Kosovo would have had a similar effect, or the regime change in Afghanistan… yet they don’t seem to have effected North Korean Policy. The Israelis and Palestinians still are not friends. Iran, Libya, Cuba have not “reformed”.
If you think the way Saddam is dealt with… whether he is killed or he survives in power, will have any effect on the list of bad guys the US likes to compile then you are wrong.
“Lets not forget civilians died in NY on 9/11 too. “
And look at how they go on about it. Saddam was not responsible for any of those deaths but he is a nice obvious target that the US thinks is weak…. can’t get Bin Liner… get Hussein instead.
“My only regret is that the party that stands to gain most from the Iraq-war…”
More likely Bush thinks it is his only chance for a second term… What other progress in the war on terror has there been?
By: keltic - 15th February 2003 at 11:24
RE: Peace Protestors
>I.[/font]
>
>As someone who knows something about history, I’d rather
>have US (however imperfect) as the leader of the free world
>than the French. French past is bloody and shameful.
>
>>
>
The US is leader of himself. History can´t be used to throw it to others faces to justify one stance of others. History is history, and all countries have skeletons in their closets. Historical events happened in different backgrounds, different patterns of behavoir, different minds, and so on. So history should be used to learn from it not to use it as a reproach.
By: Ghazi Eagle - 15th February 2003 at 11:01
RE: Peace Protestors
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 15-02-03 AT 11:06 AM (GMT)]I think the issue has gone way way beyond who supplied what to whom.
If Saddam is let off the hook there could be whole lotta troubles with all kinda other rogue nations trying to tweek the lion’s tail.
Given French record in Africa & Mid-East, their current concerns for the Iraqi civilians are a bit like the Dracula preaching vegetarianism. French motives are dubious and a recepie for far greater bloodshed around the world.
It is a (dreadful and sad sad) fact of life that civilians die in wars and they will die in Iraqi war too. But Saddam must go, one way or the other.
As someone who knows something about history, I’d rather have US (however imperfect) as the leader of the free world than the French. French past is bloody and shameful.
Lets not forget civilians died in NY on 9/11 too.
My only regret is that the party that stands to gain most from the Iraq-war (and the resulting possible deaths of UK/US soldiers and Iraqi soldiers/civilians) is hiding behind the curtains in the current debate: ISRAEL.
By: Arabella-Cox - 15th February 2003 at 08:36
RE: Peace Protestors
“I think the who supplied what and where argument in irrelevant, if these weapons are turned against us then we should be able to strike back regardless.”
I agree… but when has saddam ever used these wmds against us?
The only country in the world I see openly planning to use WMDs is the bunker buster mini nukes the US wants to make.
When do the preemptive strikes on the US begin?
(It is OK… Bush himself has justified them… he took the right to preemtively strike a nation that he perceives is a threat (presumably excluding Russia, Ukraine, China, North Korea, Cuba, and a few other countries), so Saddam can simply point out US intentions to change the regime in Iraq as an obvious and publicly stated threat and use that to justify an attack on the US… yet all he has threatened to to was kill those who invade Iraq. For someone called a madman he seems to show restraint when needed don’t you think?)
By: EN830 - 14th February 2003 at 13:59
RE: Peace Protestors
Peace Protesters,
I expect are the same people who 12 months ago were calling for an end to sanctions against Iraq, because the only people who were affected were the poor and innocent, who were dying in their 1000’s through starvation and the poor medical care brought on by the sanctions.
Now we hear that sanctions should be given a chance to work, because a war would kill 1000’s of innocent people. Sorry I’m not sure of this logic.
Also on UK TV this morning was a “peace” campaigner who claimed that war should not happen because I quote ” the West supplied Iraq with it’s arms of mass destruction”.
I agree that the west has in the past supply arms to Iraq but surely Iraq’s armed forces are/were predominately Russian equipped. I think the who supplied what and where argument in irrelevant, if these weapons are turned against us then we should be able to strike back regardless.
In this case the “it’s all about oil” is also with out foundation, Iraq has only been contributed a small amount of oil to the worlds oil consumption over the past 12 years, therefore why does the West need to invade Iraq to take over something that has very little effect our present day or future economies?
By: Demostene - 14th February 2003 at 13:20
RE: so funny…
His allowing the US to use Turkish bases is
>opposed by most Turks who agree with Germany.
Verry true, I work in the turkish part of Paris, and every day Turkish distribute leaflet against war.
By: Arabella-Cox - 14th February 2003 at 11:22
RE: so funny…
“We all realise this war is going to happen no matter what we say or think, or what ever obstacles the French, Germans, Russians or Belgians put in the way.”
That is true… so this really puts in perspective US claims that UN action on this issue should either support the US or it will prove that as an organisation is is redundant.
So much for democracy…. “if you don’t rubber stamp our war, we are going to call you redundant and have our little war anyway”.
“Lets prey and hope that it is quick and decisive,”
I don’t pray… I am an athiest, but if I did pray, why would I pray for such agression and recklessness and stupidity to succeed.
Plenty of people are going to die with this war… a fast war will just mean that the majority of those killed will be Iraqi.
It seems that the world is starting to change.
There was a long period where nothing could be done properly because there were two powerful sides with vetos… the USSR and the US.
For a brief period one was gone and there was a dictatorship.
For ten years the US ran the show but there were no major improvements, even though it could basically get what it wanted either through bribes or threats.
Now other members are finding a spine… I think this is a good thing.
The whole idea of the UN should be for everyone to have a voice in international affairs… not a place for the US to talk and the rest to listen.
” once it is over I wonder which countries will be queuing up to pick over the bones???”
I am glad we agree that the meat will be gone…
“But honestly if for example germany does not want the US to be an ally any longer, then it is time to demand a troop withdrawl. The same goes with the UK troops left in germany.”
You have the same idea of allies that Stalin had. An ally is not someone who thinks exactly the same way you do and does as they are told. An ally is someone that helps you and doesn’t try to stab you in the back. Germany is supplying troops in the Balkans to free up US troops for Iraq, it is also allowing overflights and use of bases. This is more than some allies are doing.
When there is a proven credible threat to Turkey I am sure they will be assisted by Germany. Even the Turkish PM agrees that war should be the last resort… if you listen to his speeches. His allowing the US to use Turkish bases is opposed by most Turks who agree with Germany.
By: Demostene - 13th February 2003 at 14:33
RE: so funny…
>Well if the reports about long range missiles found in Iraq
>are true, it will become increasingly difficult to keep an
>anti war standpoint. Because if the inspectors state that
>Iraq has violated against the UN resolutions and had no
>accounted those missiles in his report, there seem to be few
>options left.
That I hear is that inspectors find missile with 170 to 180 Km range so iraqis have right only 150 Km range missile, not efficient for vaporize Irak.
If the find missile with 1500 Km in place of 150 , yes but not in that case (if it will be confirmed).
Funny that, for once, USA are verry fastidious about violation of UN resolution, can’t remind that they said somethnig when Israelis violated dozens UN resolution.
By: seahawk - 13th February 2003 at 14:13
RE: so funny…
Well, this crisis is a real chance for europe to free itself from the US domination after WW2.
Remember the old saying why NATO was formed :
1. to keep the russians out of west germany
2. to keep the germans down
3. to keep the french from surrendering
But honestly if for example germany does not want the US to be an ally any longer, then it is time to demand a troop withdrawl. The same goes with the UK troops left in germany.
On the other hand, if I would be the US I would close down my bases in germany asap. As bases you must fear, you wonßt be allowed to use in a conflict are senseless.
I´m already waiting for the peace activists marching in front of US bases, shouting GI go home and SA SA SA Saddam.
Well if the reports about long range missiles found in Iraq are true, it will become increasingly difficult to keep an anti war standpoint. Because if the inspectors state that Iraq has violated against the UN resolutions and had no accounted those missiles in his report, there seem to be few options left.
By: Demostene - 13th February 2003 at 13:40
RE: SCREW NATO — Old Europe responds
>Well, the only threat to the Iraqi people to get killed in
>large numbers is chemical weapons in Saddam’s hands.
>
>Secondly, peacekeepers have never been succesfull, unless
>all parties involved agree that there is a need to them.
>History is full of examples, Srebrenica just to name one.
Peacekeeper need a clear mandate, in sebrenica they hadn’t, and the UN commander of this aera was bad level.
By: Demostene - 13th February 2003 at 13:33
RE: so funny…
>
>
>Unfortunately the UK economy is now the strongest in Europe,
>where are the French and Germans?
>
I sorry to disapointed you, but for 2002 Germany stay 3rd economy, but France is the 4th and UK the 5th (for good faith it’s necessary to said that this 2 countries are very close, and the GNP are translate between local currency in $, and the hight level of Euro help France to be 4th, but the 2 econoies are very very very close).
By: Demostene - 13th February 2003 at 13:26
RE: SCREW NATO — Old Europe responds
>At this time there`s no indication that Turkey will be
>invaded by Iraq. If that would happen, ofcourse NATO would
>have to respond. Saddam may be a madman, he`s not nuts.
The only borders between Turkey is Irak is the Iraqis Kurdistan out of Bagdad control and where there is already US troops (according with the Pentagone).
No risk of attack, it an US manipulation and a trap for Germany and France, pity they didn’t fall in it.
By: Demostene - 13th February 2003 at 13:23
RE: figaro
>Spain doesn´t needs that the germans or the french speak for
>us, it´s very simple, if another countries are the french or
>german servants it´s their problem, we had our own policy,
>and we will support Turkey.
>
Because spanish is not US servant ????
😛
By: Demostene - 13th February 2003 at 13:21
RE: figaro
>Icarus, 200 % right.
>
>And neither Belgium-France-Germany broke any EU-regulations.
>Spain, Italy, Denmark and the UK of A did, because before
>writing that letter they should have consulted their
>EU-partners.
I 300% agree:-)
By: Demostene - 13th February 2003 at 13:18
RE: figaro
>It is sad to see the France/Belgium and Germany are really
>using NATO to support their politcal gains. I´m really
>ashamed of the behavior by the german government.
No, this 3 countries stay coherent, Turkey is not under attack, and US want to force NATO to take position for war, as said the foreign minister of Belgium, we are allied not servant.
>NATO is dead now. The EU is equally dead. If I would be a
>country like Turkey, Poland or the other eastern european
>states, I would reconsider joining NATO or the EU, cause you
>can not expect any help from them in a crisis.
NATO is considered by this US gov as a european part of US army that they can use whean they want for what they want, if this thing is dead it’s a great day, but I don’t think so, US want nothing but an european army independent for it policy or their material.
I hope that the EU, that the POLAND considers as a bank ans that she doesn’t see what mean European solidarity, is dead. But the former EU with a peace, an economical, a comon policy goal is alive
>It seems to me that Germany, France and Belgium who are no
>far from any possible conflict, have forgotten that during
>the other NATO members where also protecting their safety
>during the time of the cold war.
France leaved NATO in 1966 and re-joint it in 1996, sorry but we protected our country ourself.
And by the way, who need protection, Turkey is under attack, maybe I missed something.
>And the new franco/german peace proposal is laughable. UN
>soldiers to porect the inspectors and help in the search for
>WMDs. Yeah sure we learnt in Bosnia how effective these
>soldiers are.
>Furthermore resolution 1441 demands that Iraks prooves what
>it has done with the WMDs, and the Irak has to proove it no
>longer has any WMDs. So if the Iraki government fails to
>comply with the resolution it must face the consequences.
>The weapons inspection should continue the way they are done
>now. If the inspectors feel that Irak is not helping enough
>in the case, then Irak must face the consequences.
Efforts for avoid dozen of thousands civilian death are not laughable, but that USA and UK want to go to war with these proofs that they show in UN security council, this is laughable.
>
>More inspectors do not help, if the Irakis are not willing
>to cooperate. So the question must be if they cooperate.
>That can only be answered by the inspectors already in Irak.
>If they feel they are cooperating, then no war. If they say
>Irak is misleading them and not cooperating, then war is
>inevitable.
You’re right, but we must try all solution before war
By: ELP - 13th February 2003 at 01:19
RE: SCREW NATO — Old Europe responds
I swear Geforce. You are so “old Europe!” Whoops! That slipped out. Sorry }>
By: EN830 - 12th February 2003 at 22:13
RE: so funny…
GarryB
Not bloodthirsty history shows that neither are particularly good at waging conflict, and come to think of it appeasement either.
The West’s involvement in the Bolshevik ‘revolution’ Civil War was not exactly in the same league as the French invasion of the early 1800’s or Mr Hitters attempt in 1941.
We all realise this war is going to happen no matter what we say or think, or what ever obstacles the French, Germans, Russians or Belgians put in the way.
Lets prey and hope that it is quick and decisive, once it is over I wonder which countries will be queuing up to pick over the bones???
By: keltic - 12th February 2003 at 20:23
RE: SCREW NATO — Old Europe responds
>” I can understand partially why you have such
>a hate for my nation because our foreign policy is something
>you don’t agree with.
Dear friend, let me add a comment. Never think that a critisizm to the American administration or to the foreign policies is hate for America or critizism to the people or american people. America has lots of remarkable things. Appart from the usual “flag burners”, people in Europe want to undestand America and feel pround for our american friends. But we also have the right to critisize what we consider wrong and at the same time have a more independent bevavoir.
>
> Why not just be prepared JUST IN
>CASE.
There are plenty of time to deploy previous militar plans in Turkey. They will protected, but its too soon for talking about it.
>
>How can you be so blind?
>And by the way….there is an anti-war protest at the
>University I’m enrolled in scheduled for tomorrow. Are you
>one of the scheduled speakers? I’d love to hit you with some
>paintballs. 🙂
>
>(Just kidding…don’t lose your temper.) 🙂
Spanish megas demostration will be held this Saturday.
By: Geforce - 12th February 2003 at 19:42
RE: SCREW NATO — Old Europe responds
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 12-02-03 AT 07:48 PM (GMT)]I will not deny that what Belgium did was dangerous, and it will have consequences for our country and the relations with the rest of Europe/US. But in my heart, I know this was the best thing to do, because it`s not about defending Turkey. If Iraq would attack Turkey tomorrow there`s no doubt that all 19-nations will back Turkey . But that`s not the case here.
And I`m not going to lose my temper. After all it`s valentines day. I`m not going to protest, why should I? It doesn`t matter anymore. :* I don`t hate the US.
BTW, are you at university? I thought you were studying at the air force academy. But I can imagine you shooting with paintballs at your fellow students }>. What are you studying exactly?
If you Americans want to bomb something, than drop some daisy cutters on the Hallmark factory. That would help.
By: tomcatsforever - 12th February 2003 at 19:37
RE: SCREW NATO — Old Europe responds
Hey Frank,
<<3) The demand for military help from Turkey wasn’t presented as coming from Turkey around here, but from the US. To be more precise, it was presented like this “The US requested support from NATO to protect Turkey in case of a war against Iraq”.>>
Ok, but after this US-demand Turkey itself made the same demand and the Belgian reaction stayed the same.
4) No country has the right to tell us what we have to do, especially in such dubious situations!
Ok, but Frande, Belgium and Germany won’t take their responsbility in making the world a safer place. The US and UK are doing that and what are WE doing ? We do not only fail to participate but we also are obstructing them.
And personally, I’m not backing a such demand in such conditions: Why? Because there is no war at the moment, and moving troops and hardware over there would be an act of war. If Turkey is attacked, let’s move. They are part of nato, and have to be defended. If the UN says to nato to enforce peace in Iraq, let’s go.
If Turkey is attacked it is already too late. Please tell me Frank, if Iraq fires the first day of the war a few scuds at Turkey in what way will you stop those knowing that the Dutch/German are still in western Europe because we obstructed that operation ?
You know Frank, it is not only that. It is also giving aur country a very bad name in the eyses of our allies. They ask some help from us and we refuse. What is in that case the point in staying in the alliance. I guess most of the British here still remember the stupid error (as stupid as this one now) we made in 1991 when we refused to deliver ammo to the UK troops in the Gulf. Do you really think they forget something like this ??? In case you don’t remember it was Guy Coeme who was the fool in 91 and afterwards we had to apologise.
greetings
mark
Sign In
February 10, 2003 at 7:10 am