Given the current situation with Afghanistan, and the decision to increase troops there, it is no surprise that President Obama is taking some time today to speak with Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan. Maintaining good will is strategically necessary on many levels, including on Iran, Afghanistan, and the PKK.
Some have been suggesting that Ankara is warming a bit too much towards Iran, although that may be considered a potential back door in the future for U.S. relations with Iran. Ensuring that we have Erdogan’s support in our efforts in Afghanistan is a strategical “no-brainer”. But what of the PKK?
Internationally, the Kurdish organization is generally considered a terroristic one, so it is no wonder that the U.S. would have interests in keeping it under control. However, are those interests meant to be served at any cost and by any means?
The argument could be made that the PKK is a direct (or indirect) result of Turkey breaking promises of the creation of a Kurdish state in the 1920’s, and that justifications for denying the Kurds their own land are not much different from Hussein’s claims on Kuwait – land that had previously been part of Iraq, until some lines on a map were changed. Regardless of the history of the conflict, the current concern lies in method as opposed to results.
It is unlikely that the White House will make much of the current protests, or the manner in which the Turkish authorities have been managing them. There is even less of a chance that anything will be mentioned about Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir visiting Istanbul last month – nor will there be mention of the charges of crimes against humanity levied against the Sudanese leader. We need to keep Turkey on our side, so there is nothing gained by suggesting a re-evaluation of the true nature of the PKK, or the manner of dealing with them.
The Middle East in general remains a foreign policy puzzle for the Western world, and more often than not, that is because of a failure to honestly evaluate the situation without bias. Ancient arguments often fuel current unrest in the region – a concept that can be utterly incomprehensible to Westerners. Usually the dabbling of the West in the Middle East tends to leave long-term consequences that are not apparent for years. We helped the Afghans remove the Soviets, and now we are fighting to remove the leaders that filled the void we left behind. Perhaps we will see what is reaped from Obama’s dealings in the region in another 10 or 20 years. Perhaps Obama will realize that is definitely a possibility when he speaks with Erdogan today.
Tags: Barack Obama, Kurds, Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey
Secured by