Tweet
Turkish Warning to NATO and U.S.
- Igor Muradyan
- http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/27933
- Comments - Thursday, 01 November 2012, 18:25
The war in Iraq in 2003, despite the geopolitical mask, had a blunt
economic nature since Iraq was intended to become a world reservoir of oil
for crisis, necessary for the creation of a controllable thermonuclear
reaction. However, the current situation in Iraq is obviously getting out
of control because the `central government' in Baghdad is trying to ensure
the country's sovereignty and it is not clear whether those are pan-Arabic
or Shiite ambitions.
One way or another, the great powers of the West are trying to ensure a
source of oil in the north of Iraq which is controlled by Kurds, is
independent from OPEC, Turkish routes and the Strait of Hormuz in case
South Iraq where the majority of Iraq's oil reserves are located gets out
of their control. This is also related to the game of involving Turkey in a
military conflict with the central government of Iraq in which Iran will be
involved by all means.
Turkey understands very well that it is increasingly being dragged into
local regional conflicts of border and close cross-border importance. It
thus sends signals to NATO and the United States that in this case it will
require their participation in a specific military assistance.
The ongoing events in Syria are used by Turkey to clarify its relations
with NATO and the United States. It is already something `legitimate' in
the international political discourse that Turkey's position is an
important factor of crisis in NATO, and the relations between Ankara and
the alliance bring about a lot of issues. Turkey supposed that it will
have to accept certain conditions after the negotiations with the United
States through the year 2012 but apparently they needed to have a more
preferable position. In other words, it is not a matter of the main but
a past stage of confrontation between Turkey and the United States and a
stage of confrontation when agreed actions and matching of interests
were expected.
Most probably, nothing of the kind was in place, and Turkey is involved
in the next `Vietnam' between the rivers Tigris and Euphrates which it
bewares of since the main goal is to draw the borders in the region,
including the borders of Turkey.
But how is it possible to combine the goals of creating a reserve barrel
of oil of global meaning with the Turkish `Vietnam'? Can the functions
of a `barrel' wait? In any case, Turkey warns NATO and the United States
that if they have to wage a war, if they are involved directly,
`Vietnam' will be for everyone.
Will this frighten the Western community? NATO's participation is
possible if there are relevant arguments and grounds relating to the
statutes of the alliance. Will there be such grounds?
- Igor Muradyan
- http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/27933
- Comments - Thursday, 01 November 2012, 18:25
The war in Iraq in 2003, despite the geopolitical mask, had a blunt
economic nature since Iraq was intended to become a world reservoir of oil
for crisis, necessary for the creation of a controllable thermonuclear
reaction. However, the current situation in Iraq is obviously getting out
of control because the `central government' in Baghdad is trying to ensure
the country's sovereignty and it is not clear whether those are pan-Arabic
or Shiite ambitions.
One way or another, the great powers of the West are trying to ensure a
source of oil in the north of Iraq which is controlled by Kurds, is
independent from OPEC, Turkish routes and the Strait of Hormuz in case
South Iraq where the majority of Iraq's oil reserves are located gets out
of their control. This is also related to the game of involving Turkey in a
military conflict with the central government of Iraq in which Iran will be
involved by all means.
Turkey understands very well that it is increasingly being dragged into
local regional conflicts of border and close cross-border importance. It
thus sends signals to NATO and the United States that in this case it will
require their participation in a specific military assistance.
The ongoing events in Syria are used by Turkey to clarify its relations
with NATO and the United States. It is already something `legitimate' in
the international political discourse that Turkey's position is an
important factor of crisis in NATO, and the relations between Ankara and
the alliance bring about a lot of issues. Turkey supposed that it will
have to accept certain conditions after the negotiations with the United
States through the year 2012 but apparently they needed to have a more
preferable position. In other words, it is not a matter of the main but
a past stage of confrontation between Turkey and the United States and a
stage of confrontation when agreed actions and matching of interests
were expected.
Most probably, nothing of the kind was in place, and Turkey is involved
in the next `Vietnam' between the rivers Tigris and Euphrates which it
bewares of since the main goal is to draw the borders in the region,
including the borders of Turkey.
But how is it possible to combine the goals of creating a reserve barrel
of oil of global meaning with the Turkish `Vietnam'? Can the functions
of a `barrel' wait? In any case, Turkey warns NATO and the United States
that if they have to wage a war, if they are involved directly,
`Vietnam' will be for everyone.
Will this frighten the Western community? NATO's participation is
possible if there are relevant arguments and grounds relating to the
statutes of the alliance. Will there be such grounds?