US and coalition forces can use our bases for attacks against 'Islamic State'- Turkey

[Independent voter]

I don't know if anyone is interested in this.

If ISIS were to attack Turkey, Turkey could invoke the NATO treaty and all NATO countries would have to declare war.

During the Cold War, Turkey was a close ally of the US. The political climate has changed in Turkey over the last 20 years of course.

us-and-coalition-forces-can-use-our-bases-for-attacks-against-islamic-state-turkey

Turkey will let US and coalition forces use its bases for attacks against Islamic State (IS) militants in Syria and Iraq, American defence sources have said.

The sites, they said, included a key installation within 100 miles of the Syrian border, and Turkish bases include Incirlik in the south. US defence secretary Chuck Hagel has said America wanted access to the Turkish bases.

But progress in negotiations with Turkey - including Ankara's agreement to train several thousand Syrian moderate rebels - may not be enough to stop the massacre of civilians in the border town of Kobani, where intense fighting continues.

The Obama administration had been pressing Ankara to play a larger role against the extremists, who have taken control of large swathes of Syria and Iraq, including territory on Turkey's border, and sent refugees fleeing into Turkey.

US officials said Ankara had agreed to train Syrian moderate forces on Turkish soil. A Turkish government official said the country put the number at 4,000 opposition fighters, who would be screened by its intelligence services.

As fighting continued in the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobani, US secretary of state John Kerry, speaking in Cairo, said its defence did not define the international counter-terrorism strategy.

IS militants had taken parts of Kobani, Mr Kerry indicated, but not all of it. The United Nations has warned of mass casualties if the town falls.

"There will be ups and there will be downs over the next days as there are in any kind of conflict," Mr Kerry said.

Elaborating on a theme on which the Obama administration has zeroed in, Mr Kerry said the US had been realistic about how quickly it would prevail against the militants. Officials have spoken of years of efforts ahead.

US and coalition aircraft have been bombarding territory in and around Kobani for days, launching air strikes on dozens of locations and taking out militants, weapons and other targets.

[more on the website]

[Sledfang]

Just have to keep bombing ISIL assets. Since the plan is to continue using air power I don't see how having more access to Turkey would change things very much.

[Mavett]

Just have to keep bombing ISIL's assets. Since the plan is to continue using air power I don't see how having more access Turkey would change things very much.

It's considerably closer than flying from the Gulf for example, aircraft would be able to carry more ordnance per sortie.

[Skroe]

The "war" against ISIS suddenly becomes even more like Operation Northern Watch. Which is a good thing, because it was cheap.

[Sledfang]

It's considerably closer than flying from the Gulf for example, aircraft would be able to carry more ordnance per sortie.

I was assuming there was already multiple take-off options in the region, but if Turkey gives the best advantage than that would be great.

[Independent voter]

I wonder if 20 years from now, US soldiers will still be in Turkey? I think we had a base or two there during the Cold War. I'm not sure of the history of that.

[Gumboy]

Air strikes don't seem to be helping Kobani. I hope the inevitable massacre of 10,000+ civilians rests easy on the worlds memory, could have stopped it

[Sledfang]

Air strikes don't seem to be helping Kobani. I hope the inevitable massacre of 10,000+ civilians rests easy on the worlds memory, could have stopped it

You mean we should use boots? It would only remain stable for as long as there is occupation. As soon as we leave the process would just begin again. Imo, we really need to focus on long-term efficiency.

[Skroe]

I wonder if 20 years from now, US soldiers will still be in Turkey? I think we had a base or two there during the Cold War. I'm not sure of the history of that.

We've had bases there since the Cold War too.

We'll have bases there forever most likely. It's a great arrangement for the Turks and for us.

[Jackmoves]

I was assuming there was already multiple take-off options in the region, but if Turkey gives the best advantage than that would be great.

Well the most fierce fighting atm is on the turkish border in Kobane, so being able to fly sorties from just across the border would be helpful.

Air strikes don't seem to be helping Kobani. I hope the inevitable massacre of 10,000+ civilians rests easy on the worlds memory, could have stopped it

I actually participated in a demonstration march yesterday(nice weather to so perfect)... it was pretty large, a lot of the participants were kurds though. first time I took part in a march since like 2000, when I ended up marching in the labour day march because I was downtown droping of some CDRs to class mate(who was/is a political lefty). lol

[Gumboy]

You mean we should use boots? It would only remain stable for as long as there is occupation. As soon as we leave the process would just begin again. Imo, we really need to focus on long-term efficiency.

We? As in the US? Perhaps. But Turkey could have done something about this extremely easily and chose to do nothing..why, I have no idea.

[Independent voter]

I heard over the weekend that ISIS' advance was stopped at Kobani. Guess well find out more tomorrow.

[Gumboy]

I heard over the weekend that ISIS' advance was stopped at Kobani. Guess well find out more tomorrow.

Saw on CNN this morning in between Ebola talk that over 50% of the city is in ISIS hands.

[Stelio Kontos]

Turkey's only real goal (considering their tacit support if Salafist groups including ISIS) is to ensure the Kurds get battered, massacred, and weakened enough to not be able to form a state.

Kobani's getting attacked within eyesight of Turkish troops, and that's just fine for them because they're only Kurds, after all.

[Bakis]

Turkey is in the position to prohibit a totalt slaughter in Kobani. For various reasons of which the most prominent one being about kurds they choose not to.

[Yvaelle]

Consider the problem from Turkey's perspective - they already have borders with Syria / Iraq / Iran / Georgia (which is to say Russia): these are challenging countries for the Turks to remain neighbours with - they don't want to make themselves targets - because it's simply way too easy for their enemies to hit them if they did. They have strong internal conflict with their Kurdish (eastern) population.

When US warhawks said they wanted to put boots on the ground - and wanted Muslim allies - they may as well have been talking directly to Turkey: Turkey's military is like twice the size of Saudi Arabia / Egypt / Iran, and they are a US ally, and a member of NATO. If Turkey invaded Syria, they would never hear the end of it - and while the US probably only has to put up with this Syria mess for a matter of months/years, Turkey is roommates with Syria.

A different solution is required for Syria to work.

Personally, a solution I'm supporting lately is to cut up Iraq / Syria into smaller and more culturally distinct entities. Instead of trying to lump everyone together - do the following.

Middle East 2.0 Patch Notes:
* Lebanon is extended to include the entire Syrian seaboard and associated cities up to the Turkish border: Homs, Hama, and Aleppo.
* Jordan is extended to include southwestern Syria, including Damascus, up to Palmyra.
*NEW* Kurdistan is now a thing - extending along the border with Turkey from the newly gained Lebanese seaboard, through northern (former) Syria, Iraqi Kurdistan, and Iran.
* ISIS now gets the shitty desert nobody wants in southeastern (former) Syria, and western (former) Iraq: they can keep Al Qa'im and Al Mayadin
* Kuwait gains southeastern Iraq, up to and including Baghdad
* Syria and Iraq no longer exist



What this means:

Turkey - now only borders Lebanon (bros) and Kurdistan, instead of Syria, Iraq, Iran. They have to manage relations with the Kurds of course - but I suspect they would be overjoyed with this change: no more Syria problems, no more Iraq problems, no more Iran problems.

Lebanon - Lebanon gains a large chunk of populated/developed Syria, this is the portion of Syria that they share cultural ties with - it should be a fairly natural transition for everyone involved, and would probably ultimately raise the GDP of this region above what it is now. Lebanon and this portion of Syria would be happy together I suspect.

Jordan - Jordan gains Damascus, which is was a pretty sweet city before the Syrian civil war - and probably ultimately will be once it's back under Jordanian control. Jordan absorbed a fuckton of Syrian refugees from this area during the war, so gaining this relatively affluent and valuable chunk of Syria gives them the refugees their homes back and gets them off the Jordanian dole: Jordan becomes a more powerful state as a result - and Jordan is pretty cool, so that's good.

Israel - now only borders Lebanon and Jordan, both of whom they are ~friends with - with Syria gone I expect Israel would be pretty happy.

Kurdistan - the Kurds have their own country, I'm sure they would be overjoyed at the opportunity. They have to border ISIS and Iran, but hopefully being their own state makes that worthwhile - they would likely also buddy up with Turkey - since Turkey is basically using them as a buffer state in this arrangement. I suspect even given their neighbours, they would ultimately be pretty happy for their autonomy.

Kuwait/Southern Iraq - despite the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (over oil, not anything ideological), these two regions share a lot in common culturally - and would likely be pretty happy together. Kuwait is a relatively democratic country for the region - as southern Iraq would like to be - so I think this would work out ultimately. The new Kuwait would gain pretty much all of (current) Iraq's oil supply - and the populated/developed portions of Iraq - so this new Kuwait would gain significant GDP compared to existing Iraq.

ISIS - ISIS gets their own state, yay for them! Yay! It's nothing but shitty desert that nobody wanted anyways (which is how they have 'gained' ground so quickly - by claiming the desert nobody wanted) - it has no valuable resources - no infrastructure - no population - but congrats to them. They would likely chill out for awhile in their new home, get really terrible and extremist - and then all starve to death without crops/money. It pacifies them (gives them what they want, a recognized state) and then it kills them slowly - it allows them to embrace their own sweet demise. Let them consolidate power in the middle of nowhere - makes for easier targets.

Iran - Iran loses a bit of their northwest to Kurdistan (not sure they would care, it's full of Kurds anyways and far from Tehran), but would retain Tabriz (the most westerly thing they likely care about). Might have to toss something their way to make this all happen - they are the only people really 'losing' here - even if it's a portion of land they don't really care about (the land west of Urmia Lake, which could form a natural border).

USA - Turkey/Kurdistan/Lebanon/Jordan/Israel/Kuwait - all allies/friends of varying degrees gain power/land/assets. ISIS calms down (given what they want), and also puts themselves in a vulnerable position (middle of the desert with no resources). US oil interests in Iraq are now in Kuwait's hands - to which the US already has strong ties.





Anyway - that's my idea - it's half-baked, tons of stuff to work out further - but I think it would reduce strife and conflict in the region.

[Cybran]

The best outcome would be a spread of the war to Turkey and the establishment of free greater Kurdistan.

[Skroe]

Interesting post Yvaelle, but I think you missed that were Turkey to look at that map and see Kurdistan and how it chopped off it's south eastern territory, and see the apoclaypse. A realized Kurdistan is Turkey's nightmare scenario, especially under their essentially neo-Ottoman government. I don't think that it's a practical proposal sadly, because there is litterally nothing I can think or know of after hearing about the Kurds and Turkey since 2003, that makes me think Turkey will ever let them make their own country.


And then there is the issue of the landlocked Kurdistan..

And ISIS-Land.... being a thing.

It's an interesting idea overall but is an excellent example of the Realist Axiom that today's solutions plant the seeds of tomorrow's conflicts.

[Stelio Kontos]

The best outcome would be a spread of the war to Turkey and the establishment of free greater Kurdistan.

I admit I'd take a certain amount of satisfaction if ISIS started ...carving pieces off the Turkey. Erdogan supported groups like ISIS, only serves him right to have them come in and make themselves at home.

[Skroe]

The best outcome would be a spread of the war to Turkey and the establishment of free greater Kurdistan.

Now you want to fuck the Turkish now too. Are you such a Slavic Nationalist you're still fighting fights from the 1870s?