Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Tony Blankley :: Townhall.com Columnist
From the Bosporus to the Himalayas: What a Mess
by Tony Blankley
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


With the steady decline of our selected ally Gen. Pervez Musharraf's ability to govern Pakistan and the growing alienation of the Turkish people and government from their longtime ally the United States, it is fair to say that from the Bosporus to the Himalayas, American interests continue to decline, while American policy drifts. It is ironic, if not mordant, to observe that in that zone, our policy in Iraq stands out as holding more promise for success than most of the other policies we are attempting. This week, let me consider why we are losing Turkey.

The unfolding estrangement of the Turkish people (and derivatively, the Turkish government) had been predicted and virtually unnoticed by Washington until last week. This tragic event needs to be understood thoroughly by the United States and the West because it goes to the core of our theory of how to defeat radical Islam.

About three years ago, as then-editorial page editor of The Washington Times, I hired a leading Turkish correspondent in Washington, Tulin Daloglu. She was -- and is -- a superb student of Turkish culture and politics, a secularist, a friend and admirer of America and a Turkish patriot. I asked her to describe in her column each week what the Turkish people and government were thinking, particularly about American policies and actions. I thought more attention both in Congress and the administration was needed on Turkish attitudes and American-Turkish policy.

I was deeply concerned that Turkish attitudes were slipping dangerously away from us, despite Turkey being our strongest Muslim ally in the Middle East and the model for how Israel and the West could establish a modus vivendi with a major Muslim country. Turkey has been both taken for granted and ignored by Washington for years.

In Congress, the well-organized Greek- and Armenian-American communities had a stronger voice than the Turkish-American community. And, of course, for historic reasons, Greek-Americans and Armenian-Americans usually oppose various Turkish policies. The administration's peevement with Turkey for not permitting our 4th Armored Division to enter Iraq through Turkey in 2003 led to a failure to attend carefully to a decaying relationship with our great ally. For about two years, the State Department barely communicated in a significant way -- on a policy basis -- with Turkey.

To read Daloglu's columns in The Washington Times these past years is to read week by week the sad, objective chronicle of the loss of a vital ally.

In the past week, the Turks' reaction to the congressional Armenian genocide resolution and their threat of serious military action against our allies the Iraqi Kurds finally has -- too late -- gotten Washington's attention. But beyond the appalling mess we have if Turkey invades Iraq (under the U.N. resolutions, we are, arguably, obliged to defend the Kurds from the Turks -- militarily), there is a larger and still-ignored lesson to be learned by the meltdown in support we have received from the Turkish people.

If there is one idea that Democrats and Republicans, conservatives and liberals, share on how to fight the war on terror, it is that we need to reach out to and win the hearts and minds of the moderate, modern, peaceable, more secularist Muslims and empower them to defeat by both persuasion and other methods the radical, violent fundamentalists in their religion.

That would be a very, very good idea. But consider the Turkish experience in the past six years. The Turks are the moderate, modern, peaceable, more secularist Muslims. Moreover our countries have been close allies for a half-century. And Turkey has had extensive friendly commercial relations with Israel. They are Turks, not Arabs, and are therefore less susceptible to the emotional plight of the West Bank Arabs under Israeli occupation.

And yet we have lost the Turks almost as badly as we have lost the angriest fundamentalist Arab Muslims. If we can't keep a fair share of their friendly attitude, how do we expect to win the much vaunted and awaited hearts and minds campaign?

While I hardly have the answer to that question, one lesson can be learned from the Turkish debacle (or near debacle): While we cozied up to their arch threat -- the Iraqi Kurds -- we kept telling them not to worry and to trust us. We did little to allay their fears that the Iraqi Kurds were giving the PKK terrorists succor and sanctuary in Iraq. We didn't pressure our allies the Iraqi Kurds to pressure the PKK. In the future, we are going to have to earn each ounce of friendly relations based on what we actually do for the object of our desire. Good intentions and common visions of the future are not likely to be readily available.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Tony Blankley served as press secretary to then Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich. Tony Blankley is the author of The West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations? .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Tony Blankley's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Too much talk
about the world drowning in tears. Pragmatics is what matters. Blankley is right, of course. We need to find and hold allies. How do we do this? If wisdom were easy it wouldn't be rare. We can't just abandon the Kurds, again. Just can't. But how'd you like to not have a country, like the "Turkish" Kurds? That they resort to a PKK is understandable. Alas, we do have this idea of a War on Terror. Well? We can't wink and we can't nod. It's not acceptable.

A general amnesty for the PKK can defuse a lot of the present tension. No, it's not justice. What, you think there's justice? Poor child. Pragmatics. As for Turkey, it won't happen, but something like a federated region for their Kurds. You know, like what we used to have. States. Self-governance is generally a good idea, and even when it's not, it's a craving in the human heart. You'd think, since we know something about this, that we'd know something about this.

The world is almost hopeless.

J
http://forgottenprophets.blogspot.com


Jack - hopelessness
i've come to see Islam's influence on the world in terms of this

Kobayushi Maru

actions do have consequences.
Was not part of our rationale for removing Saddam the ideal for self determination of the peoples in Iraq?

Well, now, we now are witnessing a consequence of this self determination.

Remember, Turkey OPPOSED the U.S. invasion of Iraq to remove Saddam, PRECISELY because Saddam, although a tyrant, did brutally suppress Kurdish aspirations for their own state.

Blankley seems depressed over the apparent dwindling of support for America in Turkey, the mideast and world, generally.

Yet regarding Turkey, was it not our president whose decision to invade Iraq and remove the force keeping Kurdish dreams of statehood alive, that has caused such alarm within Turkey(vis-vis the Kurds)?


Actually
This dates from Ronald Reagan's time.

Basically, Reagan was a blunderer when it came to the (extended) Muddle East.
(1) He gave arms indiscriminately to Pakistan's then leader Zia so as the Soviets would be driven out of Afghanistan. As Zia had decided that Pakistan had lost a war due to "insufficient devoutness" (never enters the mind of a turdocrat that their warcrimes*** may be a reason), he was more generous in giving weapons to most-hardline Sunnis than to less-fanatical Muslims--result, rise of Taliban.
(2) He rescued Yaser Arafat from Beirut to Tunis in 1982--and was rewarded promptly by the latter's giving help to Hezbullah against US Marines in Beirut.


***In 1971, Pakistan Army had murdered 3.5 million (including 2.3 million Muslims) of the country's then-citizens (in Pakistan's then-Eastern wing, which separated away as Bangladesh) in "Operation Searchlight". There are claims (which, when I mentioned to Bangla acquaintances, were met with incredulity; no doubt though that he was evil enough to do so) that Zia had authorised even WORSE (not in number but in degree) atrocities in Sindh during his 11-year misrule.

Muslims cannot ever be our "allies"
I have a simple rule of thumb:

AMERICA SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH MUSLIM NATIONS.

It's that simple really.

No Muslims can ever be true friends of America because Islam, taken literally, can never allow that.

Turkey only APPEARED to be an ally of the U.S. as a marriage of convenience in the Cold War, and because back then Islamist extremism hadn't made a big splash yet.

But Islamist extremism is now rising in Turkey, as it is now rising in EVERY other supposedly "moderate" Muslim country. It's a worldwide political pandemic and Muslims everywhere are catching it.

Sarkozy is right: Turkey does NOT belong as a member of the European Union. And the day is fast approaching when the U.S. will need to consider expelling Turkey from NATO as well. As NATO becomes a force for combating Islamic extremism, we've got a nation, Turkey, that is increasingly on the "wrong side." We wouldn't have tolerated Communist nations in NATO during the Cold War, would we?

Dogg is WRONG!
The Barbary coast pirates represented a nation--which, last I checked was over 95% Muslim.

And by extorting "protection money" from nascent US, and kidnapping sailors for ransom, they DID declare war against US in early 1800's.

And the statement that "muslims...hate us for our freedom" is on the nail--as it also explains the hatred of many non-Indian Muslims against India.

It is fear of freedom.
I don't think Muslims hate the west for our freedom.

They don't covet our freedom.

They FEAR our freedom.

"Freedom" carries with it certain assumptions.

Some of these assumptions are corrosive to Islam.

Among them is the freedom to call into question the Prophet Mohammad(may Allah bless and protect Him), including the freedom to question his legitimacy, as well as to question the legitimacy of the Koran.

In addition, freedom would include the right to REJECT Sharia law.

The world of Islam does not desire freedom, because it cannot abide the questions and scrutiny such freedom entails.

Bush fundamentally misunderstands this.

For jerabaub
Your comment "The world of Islam does not desire freedom, because it cannot abide the questions and scrutiny such freedom entails" is on the nail.

This is precisely why attempts at combining Islam with democratic process after WW2 had the following results:
(1) as of 1989, three attempts with FOUR failures
(2) as of 1999, four attempts with four definite failures and one dubious
(3) as of 2004, six attempts (two, in Afghanistan and Iraq, done through US intervention), with six failures, same "dubious" (Bangladesh) as #2
(4) as of 2007, six attempts with SEVEN failures

Even the reason Bangladesh was "dubious" was due to its Bengali culture which dominates over all other aspects (the nation is about 89% Muslim) and led to a "one party in power, other doing bandh" scenario.

Also counter response for Dogg
since you used the comment "not a single Muslim nation has EVER declared war on America", I inferred that I can go back through US's entire history as independent (and even through 13-colonies) history for counterexamples; you've just stated that several Muslim nations DID declare war on America.

Racism
Tell me MLDog, what race is muslim?

For JamesJ
The only one-race religion is Zoroastrianism--if you consider northern sub-continentals (vast majority of Parsis) the exact same race as Iranians (the remainder); not coincidentally, Zoroastrianism is one of the few known religions that ABSOLUTELY CANNOT expand by conversion.

Turkey as an Ally
It is in the United States' national interest to maintain Turkey as an ally.

Turkey wants to remain an ally, but won't take getting kicked in the teeth.

This is the repeated plight of America, that George Bush's administration has done a poor job of diplomacy.

Frankly, it's only a reflection of the way Bush has handled domestic politics: Steamroll the opposition if possible, and ignore. But if that isn't possible, isolate and marginalize. Finally, ridicule and humiliate.

Negotiating in good faith is a last resort and reluctantly entered into.

Further, Bush requires the opposition to come begging and kiss Bush's ring if you decide to play ball.

Now, admittedly, this did work early in his 1st term, but not now.

It never did work in foreign policy.

Rudy Giuliani is the status quo Bush candidate.

Why would Republicans want a status quo candidate when the present guy is hovering at a whopping 24% approval rating?



Do not negotiate

Turkey versus Kurds
In "Too much talk", Jack H. writes that the Kurds in Turkey should be given a federated region with self-governance. The fact is, Kurds are diffused throughout Turkey, and more Kurds live in the rest of the country and the largest cities, such as Istanbul, Ankara, and Izmir, than there are Kurds in the Southeast. Should they all be shipped back to that region if they ever get their own federation?


Since some Americans are so cavelier with other people's land,would they like to answer this question: We also have a large minority group here in the USA, namely the Mexican Americans; should they also be given their "federated region"? And, if the Mexican Americans were to take arms and demand territory from us, and kill our civilians and the military, how would we react to those who might look favorably upon these Mexican-Americans?

Why don't we put the "needle in our skin", before giving other countries free and unwanted advice?

Erkin

Common Sense Solutions
The text of this speech lays out some common sense solutions based on an insightful and strategic approach to the challenges we face in the war on terror:

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View &Blog_id=507

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.