Tweet
Turkish Troops Shouldn't Take Part
ArmRadio.am
01.08.2006 18:29
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
In the past three weeks, hundreds of innocent men, women and
children have been killed and thousands injured on both sides of
the Lebanese-Israeli border. While the bulk of the blame for the
fighting falls on the warring parties, the United States, as the only
superpower, has its share of responsibility in this bloody affair.
The disastrous situation in the Middle East is about to get even
worse, thanks to officials in Washington who have other agendas than
bringing peace to the region. David Ignatius revealed in his July
21 article in the Washington Post that the Bush administration was
considering the deployment of a multinational "stabilization force"
in southern Lebanon, composed of troopsfrom Turkey and several other
countries. Unlike a traditional United Nations peacekeeping force,
this would be a robust peace-enforcement unit that would be ready to
shoot it out with Hezbollah fighters or anyone else in their way.
The United States and Britain, with their forces bogged down in Iraq
and Afghanistan, and unwelcome in Lebanon due to their tendentious
approach to the Middle East conflict, are looking for others to die in
place of their own soldiers. The Turkish Daily News quoted a Washington
analyst stating that sending Turkish troops to Lebanon "involves a
major risk of serious casualties while doing somebody else's work."
Turkish leaders, on the other hand, despite the obvious dangers posed
by such an engagement, are eager to send thousands of their soldiers
to the South of Lebanon, not to bring peace, but to extend their
country's influence far beyond their borders. Turks know that, up
until a century ago, most neighboring countries were a part of the
Ottoman Empire. Unfortunately for the Turks and their Washington
cohorts, the population of these countries also remembers that
infamous Empire, but not so fondly. In addition to Armenians, the
ancestorsof the inhabitants of today's Lebanon, be they Syrians,
Lebanese, Palestinians or Kurds suffered untold deprivations and
outright massacres under the repressive Ottoman regime.
Of particular concern is the appearance of Turkish troops in a
country with a sizable Armenian population, the direct descendants
of the 1.5 million Armenians massacred and expelled during the 1915
Genocide. In the 1970's and 80's there were scores of attacks by
young Lebanese Armenians against Turkish diplomats in Lebanon and
elsewhere. Bringing thousands of Turkish troops inthe proximity of a
large Armenian community for the first time since 1915 contains all
the ingredients of a bloody clash in the making. In the process of
trying to quell one conflict, the Bush administration is sowing the
seeds of future new confrontations.
In addition, most Arabs do not look too kindly at the strategic
alliance between Israel and Turkey. These two countries along with
the United States conduct periodic joint military exercises. Another
complicating factor is that the Turkish soldiers and people in southern
Lebanon belong to two different, often rival Islamic sects. The Turks
are Sunni, while the Hezbollah fighters and their followers are Shia.
Fortunately, not everyone in Turkey is as eager as Prime Minister Recep
Tayyp Erdogan to send Turkish soldiers to southern Lebanon. Several
opposition leaders were quoted as saying that Turkey should not enter
"such a swamp."
An international force is probably necessary to maintain the peace on
the Lebanese-Israeli border, but does it have to include a Turkish
contingent? There are plenty of other countries that could send
troops to Lebanon without risking a confrontation with the local
population. If the United States andIsrael are so enamored with
Turkish soldiers, they can station them on the Israeli, rather than
the Lebanese side of the border!
As there are several Armenians in the Lebanese cabinet and parliament,
they should ask their government to reject the participation of Turkish
troops in the proposed multinational force. Such a force cannot be sent
without the approval of the Lebanese authorities. When Turkey offered
to contribute troops to the coalition in Iraq, the Iraqi government,
despite pressure from Washington, refused to accept them, in order
to avoid clashes between Turkish soldiers and Iraqi Kurds.
It is simply unacceptable that in the pursuit of their political
agendas, the neo-cons in Washington encourage sending Turkish
troops to Lebanon. The international community should not allow such
irresponsible action that would perpetuate the conflict in the Middle
East rather than bring peace and stability to the region.
ArmRadio.am
01.08.2006 18:29
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
In the past three weeks, hundreds of innocent men, women and
children have been killed and thousands injured on both sides of
the Lebanese-Israeli border. While the bulk of the blame for the
fighting falls on the warring parties, the United States, as the only
superpower, has its share of responsibility in this bloody affair.
The disastrous situation in the Middle East is about to get even
worse, thanks to officials in Washington who have other agendas than
bringing peace to the region. David Ignatius revealed in his July
21 article in the Washington Post that the Bush administration was
considering the deployment of a multinational "stabilization force"
in southern Lebanon, composed of troopsfrom Turkey and several other
countries. Unlike a traditional United Nations peacekeeping force,
this would be a robust peace-enforcement unit that would be ready to
shoot it out with Hezbollah fighters or anyone else in their way.
The United States and Britain, with their forces bogged down in Iraq
and Afghanistan, and unwelcome in Lebanon due to their tendentious
approach to the Middle East conflict, are looking for others to die in
place of their own soldiers. The Turkish Daily News quoted a Washington
analyst stating that sending Turkish troops to Lebanon "involves a
major risk of serious casualties while doing somebody else's work."
Turkish leaders, on the other hand, despite the obvious dangers posed
by such an engagement, are eager to send thousands of their soldiers
to the South of Lebanon, not to bring peace, but to extend their
country's influence far beyond their borders. Turks know that, up
until a century ago, most neighboring countries were a part of the
Ottoman Empire. Unfortunately for the Turks and their Washington
cohorts, the population of these countries also remembers that
infamous Empire, but not so fondly. In addition to Armenians, the
ancestorsof the inhabitants of today's Lebanon, be they Syrians,
Lebanese, Palestinians or Kurds suffered untold deprivations and
outright massacres under the repressive Ottoman regime.
Of particular concern is the appearance of Turkish troops in a
country with a sizable Armenian population, the direct descendants
of the 1.5 million Armenians massacred and expelled during the 1915
Genocide. In the 1970's and 80's there were scores of attacks by
young Lebanese Armenians against Turkish diplomats in Lebanon and
elsewhere. Bringing thousands of Turkish troops inthe proximity of a
large Armenian community for the first time since 1915 contains all
the ingredients of a bloody clash in the making. In the process of
trying to quell one conflict, the Bush administration is sowing the
seeds of future new confrontations.
In addition, most Arabs do not look too kindly at the strategic
alliance between Israel and Turkey. These two countries along with
the United States conduct periodic joint military exercises. Another
complicating factor is that the Turkish soldiers and people in southern
Lebanon belong to two different, often rival Islamic sects. The Turks
are Sunni, while the Hezbollah fighters and their followers are Shia.
Fortunately, not everyone in Turkey is as eager as Prime Minister Recep
Tayyp Erdogan to send Turkish soldiers to southern Lebanon. Several
opposition leaders were quoted as saying that Turkey should not enter
"such a swamp."
An international force is probably necessary to maintain the peace on
the Lebanese-Israeli border, but does it have to include a Turkish
contingent? There are plenty of other countries that could send
troops to Lebanon without risking a confrontation with the local
population. If the United States andIsrael are so enamored with
Turkish soldiers, they can station them on the Israeli, rather than
the Lebanese side of the border!
As there are several Armenians in the Lebanese cabinet and parliament,
they should ask their government to reject the participation of Turkish
troops in the proposed multinational force. Such a force cannot be sent
without the approval of the Lebanese authorities. When Turkey offered
to contribute troops to the coalition in Iraq, the Iraqi government,
despite pressure from Washington, refused to accept them, in order
to avoid clashes between Turkish soldiers and Iraqi Kurds.
It is simply unacceptable that in the pursuit of their political
agendas, the neo-cons in Washington encourage sending Turkish
troops to Lebanon. The international community should not allow such
irresponsible action that would perpetuate the conflict in the Middle
East rather than bring peace and stability to the region.