Is Turkoman a friend and Kurd a foe?
Similarly we have now discovered Turkomans all of a sudden! Yet, Turkomans have always been there. They were oppressed by Saddam Hussein, assimilated, worn out. However, since Iraq was important for us and getting along well with Saddam was the latest craze, we chose to ignore the Turkomans.
By "discovering" Turkomans we now do the right thing. However, this is getting out of control — because some "hardliners" in Ankara, civilians and the military alike, wanted to use the Turkomans. In other words they intended to drive Turkomans as a wedge between Kurds and Arabs to block the Kurdish attempts to bring Northern Iraq under Kurdish control.
That created the impression that we have come up to protect Turkomans not because they are our co-ethnics but in order to prevent a potential Kurdish state by, sowing, in a way, seeds of dissent in Northern Iraq.
Under the circumstances, Kurds have inevitably started viewing both Turkey and Turkomans in a "negative light". They have reached the following conclusion: "Turkey sees them as a foe while considering Turkomans a friend and an ally."
Should we see Kurds as a foe?
These days a veritable political fight is taking place in northern Iraq. A sharing out, a restructuring effort, is the issue.
Kurds and Arabs are having a cutthroat fight. We, meanwhile, are trying to get Turkomans too become involved in this fight.
That way we are putting Turkomans into the "friend" category while we increasingly put Kurds into the "foe" category.
We have the right not to permit in northern Iraq the kind of development we do not like and to strive to affect the developments. We must, like everybody else, protect our long-term interests. The point is, should it not be better if we acted in a more careful manner when doing that?
The more we raise our voice the tougher become Talabani and Barzani. This causes a chain reaction, an escalation. Developments get out of control. Mutual hostilities arise.
Yet, a considerable part of the Iraqi Kurds — with whom we keep having a quarrel — are the relatives of our own citizens of Kurdish origin who live in Turkey. When we make threatening remarks in a loud voice we are, in a way, offending our own Kurds as well, aren’t we?
This scares me. I feel that we are preparing the ground that will create fresh problems for us. A cool-headed assessment should be made.
In the war the optimistic scenarios has saved everybody
Before the Iraq War began I dwelt in this column on two scenarios.
According to the PESSIMISTIC SCENARIO war would go on for a long time. Americans would suffer great losses. Thousands of civilians would die in Iraq. Then a civil war would begin and Iraq would become fragmented. The coalition partners would sink into a swamp.
In that case Turkey would suffer big losses. A long war would push the economy into an even deeper crisis. Since the troop deployment motion was not passed Washington would not give Turkey any support. Turkey might be plunged into darkness.
Due to the coalition partners’ failure to bring Iraq under their control due to stiff resistance, Turkey’s worst fears would materialize in Northern Iraq. Kurds would seize the oil wells and the PKK would be able to "revive" itself.
American public, especially, might get more and more angry at Turkey due to the high casualty figures.
Now I see that, starting with Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, government officials are saying, boastfully, "There were those who claimed that the country was going to sink, that everything would was going to be disrupted. See what happened? Thanks to the confidence we have inspired the Turkish people remain soundly on their feet, standing tall. There has been no economic tremor. Even the dollar price is declining."
They argue that this point has been reached thanks to the policies their government has conducted.
No one comes up and says, "Thank God the OPTIMISTIC SCENARIO has materialized. War came to an end soon. There were few casualties. And we got away."
We really must have been lucky. Our fears have not materialized.
