What's new

Iraq’s Maliki slams Turkey, claims it can bring civil war to region

Maliki's criticism of Turkey undermines his own legitimacy, observers say
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's harsh criticism of Turkey for what he considered interference in the domestic realm of Iraq is sure to draw the ire of Turkey, as observers have already labeled Maliki's reaction “a regrettable move” that will undermine his capacity to cooperate with neighbors that are hoping for stability in Iraq.
In a televised interview with Alhurra TV on Friday, Maliki slammed Turkey for its “surprise interference” in his country's internal affairs, claiming that Turkey's role could bring disaster and civil war to the region -- something he claimed will make Turkey suffer just the same.

“We ... did not expect the way they [Turkey] interfere in Iraq,” Maliki said in an interview with the Alhurra TV station on Friday, AFP news agency reported on Friday. “And we do not allow that absolutely,” Maliki underlined.

“We recently noticed their surprise interventions with statements, as if Iraq is controlled or run by them,” he said, adding that Turkey's latest statements interfered in domestic Iraqi affairs.

Maliki's remarks came two days after he was warned by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan that his actions are taking Iraq away from democracy and urged him to take steps that would reduce tensions in the war-torn country following a series of bombings in the capital of Baghdad after Maliki issued an arrest warrant for Sunni Vice President Tariq Al-Hashemi last month.

In a phone call last week held between Erdoğan and Maliki, Erdoğan urged Maliki to take steps to reduce tension in Iraq. Erdoğan stated that transformation of mistrust into animosity toward a coalition partner will negatively affect democracy in Iraq, a veiled warning to the Iraqi prime minister that his latest arrest warrant for Hashimi is a blow to democracy in the war-torn country. Erdoğan previously stated that Turkey was concerned about the possibility of “another fight among brothers in Iraq” and that Iraq was subject to provocations of parties from outside the country, pushing it to a brink of sectarian war. Turkish officials have kept stressing that Iraqi stability, with all its sectarian and ethnic blocs, is needed for peace in the entire region, and petty calculations are not a part of Turkey's foreign policy anywhere in the world.

Although Maliki pledges that he is working to represent all blocs and backgrounds equally, observers doubt that the Iraqi prime minister is doing a satisfactory job and suspicion is rising that his stance in favor of or against any neighbor would undermine his legitimacy in the international arena drastically.

“If it is acceptable to talk about our judicial authority, then we can talk about theirs, and if they talk about our disputes, we can talk about theirs,” Maliki said in the interview, claiming that Turkey is playing a role that might bring disaster and civil war to the region and that Turkey itself will suffer because it has different sects and ethnicities.

“Malki has been reactive against Turkey ever since the Iraqi elections, convinced that Turkey's close ties with his major rival, Iraqiya, pose a threat to his hold on power,” Bilgay Duman, an Iraq expert from the Ankara-based Center for Middle Eastern Strategic Research (ORSAM), told Today's Zaman on Sunday. Duman also claimed that Maliki was “all the more unreasonable,” while Iranian parliament speaker Ali Larijani was in Turkey trying to cultivate stronger cooperation between Turkey and Iran to provide leverage to an immediate solution to the current polarization in Iraq. “Turkey is trying not to engage Iran in a power showdown, but behind the stage observers have the feeling that Iran finds Turkey's moves in the region to be aimed at its benefits,” Duman added, raising the possibility that Maliki's words were motivated by Iranian leadership, “which desperately needs conflict in the region to keep Iranians' attention fixed on the “fabricated danger from the outside.”

With the belief that the turbulence in Iraq is a natural reflection of the vague political moves of Syria and Iran, Alaeddin Yalçınkaya, head of the international relations department at Sakarya University, told Today's Zaman that Maliki has the roots of his power in Iran in a way that excludes other actors of the region for the sake of a sectarian Shiite alliance. “A perspective based on human rights is the way Turkey would like to choose when it deals with Iraq, since upsetting balances in the country would devastate everybody,” Yalçınkaya added, convinced that religious or ethnic alliances would not help Iraqi politics stand in unity after the US pullout.

Meanwhile, many attacks in recent days in Iraq have targeted the country's Shiite majority, increasing fears of a serious outbreak of sectarian violence following the withdrawal of US troops last month.

Large-scale sectarian fighting pushed the country to the verge of civil war in 2006-2007. Well-armed Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias continue to operate in the country, while suicide bombings are becoming increasingly frequent in the country.

The increase in violence comes as Iraq's leaders remain locked in a political crisis that is stoking tensions between the Shiite majority now in power and the country's Sunnis, who benefited most from ousted dictator Saddam Hussein's rule.

The leaders of Iraq's rival sects have been locked in a standoff since last month, when the Shiite-dominated government called for Hashemi's arrest on terrorism charges, just as the last American troops were completing their withdrawal from the country. Hashemi, Iraq's highest-ranking Sunni politician, remains holed up in the semiautonomous Kurdish region in the north, out of reach of state security forces. Observers liken Hashemi's reaction to Iran for responsibility of the arrest warrant Maliki bloc issued against him to the reaction Maliki displayed to Turkey when the country warned him to watch out for equal representation and refrain from politicizing his political rivalry with other blocs.

During his phone conversation with US President Barack Obama on Friday, Erdoğan also talked about the latest situation in Iraq, where two leaders agreed that a broad-based and inclusive government is necessary for stability in the country.


2012-01-15

Today's Zaman with wires * Ankara
 
.
Basicly, the guy we supported was arrested for political competition and Maliki goverment -no one know who controls them. It could be U.S or Iran which they are both Shia and most of their party members are proIran-

Our reason for interfering their internal Politics

1) Maliki does not want to attack PKK and praticly feeds them to use them against Turkey

2) Maliki's party is proIran and proIran goverment will be praticly disaster for Turkey and U.S

3)Sunni Party is pro-Turkey and their leader was arrested.

4) Sunni Party is against PKK and if given chance they will pratily wipe Northen Iraq PKK camps of the map.

Our only justified reason is Maliki's use of PKK and others are praticly just our bussines and strategic interests. I hope Sunni Party will win the eletions and with joint operations we can clean PKK of from Northen Iraq.

The next election will happen in 4 years. Which means the shia government of Iraq has 4 years to completely clean the sunnis from government branches. But on the other hand, before hesitating to accuse the shia's of cleaning sunnis (arrest warrant for Tariq Hashemi who fled to Northern Iraq) we must have a closer look at Iraq.

Firstly, Hashemi is accused of orchestrating bombing attacks on shias in Baghdad and elsewhere. If this is true he is not innocent.
Secondly, the allegations about Maliki's government supporting PKK groups is not fully clear. We don't know exactly if it is the Kurdish government in the north who supports PKK or if it is the shias in the south.

We have to look at Iraq from several angles. There are three main groups (there are other insignificant groups as well), 1) the Shias, 2) the Sunni-arabs 3) the sunni-Kurds.

1: The Sunni-arabs are most trustable when it comes to fighting the PKK.
2: We don't know exactly if the Shias are supporting the PKK. It may be they are using them to counter Turkish growing influence. Iran has recently fought excessively with PKK and killed a couple hundreds. This may indicate that Iran (the Shias) does not support the PKK against Turkey.
3: The sunni-Kurds has in the past supported the PKK. We don't know if they are truly changing color.

In other words, the Iraq situation needs a closer examination based on raw footage and evidence.

Edit: When i divide in into Sunni-kurds, Sunni-Arabs and Shias, i don't mean the entire population of those groups. I am talking about certain individuals and certain politically motivated groups inside those goups. Hence, i refrain from generalizing the whole groups.
 
.
Former diplomat İskit: Tehran may be planning to divide Iraq
Tehran may have plans to divide Iran in order to increase its influence in the region following the Arab Spring, which has made the region unstable and unpredictable, a former diplomat has told Monday Talk, adding that Turkey better be cautious in this time of transition in its neighborhood.

As pressures increase on Iran, Tehran tries many tactics. For example, it threatens to respond to Western sanctions by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran may also be planning to divide Iraq,” said retired Ambassador Temel İskit, evaluating Turkey's foreign policy challenges in 2012.

“Iraq's division would support Iran's claim to be the regional power. We cannot think of an Iraq independent of Iran. Iran has a great influence on Shiites,” he also said.

Ankara and Tehran have recently had meetings in the face of the United States' latest sanctions on Iran targeting Tehran's ability to sell crude oil. The European Union and Japan are also drawing up sanctions on Iran.

On that and more, İskit addressed the most challenging foreign policy questions of this year, answering our questions.

What do you expect to happen in the Middle East and North Africa in 2012, especially with regard to Turkey as the country in this region where hot developments have been taking place?

I don't have a crystal ball. But we can look at the present picture and discuss what Turkey can do in that environment. There are great instabilities in the countries of the region. The closest ones to Turkey are in Iraq and Syria. Contrary to the rest of the region, northern Iraq has become a place of stability. Even though Turkey still does not call that region “Iraqi Kurdistan,” the Kurdish administration has become an entity, a semi-state that Turkey cooperates with.

But the rest of Iraq is in turmoil.

The presence of American troops in Iraq was helping to keep a balance between Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq, but with the departure of the American troops, the balance has gone. Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's attempt to arrest one of the country's top Sunni politicians, Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, accusing him of running a hit squad targeting government officials, ignited the long-lasting Shiite-Sunni division. [Hashemi denies the allegations. He is staying as a guest of Iraqi Kurdish President Jalal Talabani, out of reach of security forces under Baghdad's control.] We don't know how this issue is going to evolve. Turkey supports Iraq's unity, but its influence is quite limited with regard to developments in Iraq. Turkey does not have influence when it comes to Shiites, and Maliki has not refrained from confronting Turkey. He is supported by Iran. For Sunnis, the benefits of siding with Turkey are not clear since this might strengthen the divisive forces in Iraq.

There are comments suggesting a possible Turkish-Kurdish-Sunni axis.

There are, but what is it going to lead to? Such a grouping would be against Maliki, the Shiites, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah. Turkey wouldn't be able to afford being in that position; it would be harmful for Turkey to take such a biased stance. Turkey should be able to protect its objectivity as much as it can. Yes, there is a possibility that Iraq will be divided, and the United States would probably not have the power to interfere since US troops have left the country.

‘Moscow might provide refuge to Assad'

How does Iran play a role in that picture?

As pressures increase on Iran, Tehran tries many tactics. For example, it threatens to respond to Western sanctions by closing the Strait of Hormuz [a transit route for a fifth of the world's oil]. Tehran may also be planning to divide Iraq. Iraq's division would support Iran's claim to be the regional power. We cannot think of an Iraq independent of Iran. Iran has a great influence on Shiites.

What would you say about Iran's relations with Syria?

Iran does not have as direct of an influence on Syria as on Iraq, but Iran and Syria are traditional allies. Tehran would not like to see [Syrian President] Bashar al-Assad fall. Moscow has more influence over Syria than Tehran. Russia has maintained support for the increasingly isolated Assad, whose nation has been one of Moscow's closest strategic partners in the Middle East and a big purchaser of its weapons. Russian warships recently docked at a Russian naval maintenance and supply facility in the Syrian port of Tartus to display support for the Assad government.

There were news reports that Assad may soon call Russia home.

It is likely that Moscow will provide Assad refuge, if that means the figurehead is gone, but the Assad regime is well and alive. Look at what happened in Egypt; Mubarak is gone but the military has the ropes now. What will happen in Syria is of utmost importance for Turkey. The first concern for Turkey is with regard to the flow of refugees from Syria, if growing instability leads to a refugee crisis. Turkey better continue to do what it is already doing: support dissidents of that country. However, supporting armed opposition groups would be a mistake; a military intervention would be unacceptable. Some Western writers, especially a number of American commentators, tend to suggest the idea that since a non-Muslim power's intervention in Syria would not be received well in the region, Turkey should do it because it has a claim to regional power status against Iran. This idea carries with it the air of provocation. Turkey's recent overconfidence makes it exposed to such calls with ulterior motives.

‘Time to be cautious for Turkey in foreign policy'

Opponents of the Syrian regime have suggested creating a buffer zone along the country's borders that would protect civilians and enable the army's soldiers to defect. Do you think Turkey can take this responsibility on?

For Turkey to do it, there needs to be a civil war in Syria leading to a flow of refugees. Until that happens, Turkey cannot do it, because if it does, this buffer zone will be a safe haven for Syria's armed opposition. But if thousands of refugees are fleeing Syria, then a buffer zone could be established on the Syrian side of the border. Even that would be risky because if Syrian armed forces try to attack those refugees, Turkey would have to send its fighter jets to the area. Back to Turkey's overconfidence, those changes and the situation of instability in the region are likely to teach Ankara its limits.

One incident that tested Ankara's limits was with regard to its policy toward Israel. Turkish foreign policy has unnecessarily been taken hostage by the situation in Gaza. Another incident involved Iran. Ankara's previous policy toward Iran made Turkey a guarantor for Tehran, though the situation changed recently as Ankara agreed to host NATO's early warning radar as part of a NATO missile defense system which is capable of countering ballistic missile threats from Iran.

With so much instability in its neighborhood, it is time Turkey becomes cautious in its foreign policy. It is better for Turkey to observe the situation around it carefully. No one knows how the events will evolve since there is currently a process of transition. And in a transition, being cautious is the most important virtue.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu visited Tehran last week and said Turkey was ready to host further talks with world powers and Iran over its nuclear program. In addition, Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said after meeting with Turkish leaders in Ankara that Tehran supports the idea. What is happening?

Those sanctions would make Iran even more cornered as its ability to sell oil would be seriously harmed. Iran is already uneasy because its main ally in the region, Assad, is in a bad situation, and now comes more Western pressure. As I mentioned, to fight its isolation, Iran would try to use its influence on the Shiites of Iraq. It is unlikely that Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz as this will hurt Iran the most. Under the circumstances, Iran has another card, the card of negotiations. But Iran has to convince the West that it is sincere. It is also highly unlikely that the United States and Israel will resort to military measures against Iran since this would lead to a deepening of the world economic crisis. Therefore, it is likely that disagreements between Iran and the West will be long-lasting. In that environment, it is good that Turkey has the ability to talk with Iran, but that does not mean that Turkey does not have any problems with Iran, which may pose a constant threat [once it obtains] nuclear arms. Also Iran does not trust Turkey because of our Syria policy and because we agreed to host the NATO radar. All in all, relations between Turkey and Iran are not very bright, but both Ankara and Tehran will avoid serious conflict with each other. In this vein, Iran will not actively support the PKK [outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party].

Today's Zaman Mobile Edition
 
.
Forget about shia, sunni and the kurds, We firstly need to protect the Turkmen minorty in the north, those people are being opressed basically under our nose! Such a shame. Our government is ignoring them only!
 
.
Forget about shia, sunni and the kurds, We firstly need to protect the Turkmen minorty in the north, those people are being opressed basically under our nose! Such a shame. Our government is ignoring them only!

Turkey can't go in and protect those people militarily. And as i indicated above, we should refrain from generalizing. As far as my observations, northern Iraq is progressing much faster than other parts in Iraq. Moreover, i don't think we should only be interested in Turkmens just because they are of same descent. For south Turkey and North iraq to become a better place, we got to improve the standard of the whole region, including the Kurds, Turks and Arabs. After we can live in harmony without any sectarian terrorist groups who constantly try to disrupt the positive developments we can establish peace and harmony. Therefore, we first and foremost need to increase cooperation with Northern Iraq and increase the living standard in Kurdish populated areas in south Turkey.
 
.
Maliki, Ahmadi Nejad & Karzai are biggest fitnas of Islamic world.
 
.
Turkey can't go in and protect those people militarily. And as i indicated above, we should refrain from generalizing. As far as my observations, northern Iraq is progressing much faster than other parts in Iraq. Moreover, i don't think we should only be interested in Turkmens just because they are of same descent. For south Turkey and North iraq to become a better place, we got to improve the standard of the whole region, including the Kurds, Turks and Arabs. After we can live in harmony without any sectarian terrorist groups who constantly try to disrupt the positive developments we can establish peace and harmony. Therefore, we first and foremost need to increase cooperation with Northern Iraq and increase the living standard in Kurdish populated areas in south Turkey.

Firstly im not talking about military, im talking about political backup and protection as country, goverment, army, people as a whole!!

I agree with al your increasing living standard etc, but now reality is not like that! Before all other things its firstly about peace and security, they live in fear! if there's no peace, security and rights then all the other things become unimportant! i've seen a documentary of the northern turkmens on SamanyoluTV it was really sad, they are being ruthlessly opressed by the same kurds who are asking for more rights from Turkey!
 
.
Maliki is showing support to Assad through this. Maliki and Assad are like Ahmadinejad now because they report to Khameni. So naturally they will stand with each other. Turkey being a pro-Syrian revolution country have angered khameni and this his sub-leaders on the region.

I applaud turkey for choosing to stand by us in this time. The middle east was already extremely divided and the Arab-Spring reshuffled allot and made some stronger and some weaker politically. Iranians already say that Iraq is in their pocket exactly as the US planned. By creating a huuuuuge rift in the midde east the US has managed to keep countries from being too strong and successfully kept the power level as balanced as possible it all falls under the "divide and conquer" doctrine. And what other way to influence and divide the middle east landscape except with the only language it has known for thousands of years "religion"
 
.
i know it might sound a bit prejudiced and hatred calling, but... Saddam was thousand times better than this "politicians" we see in todays Iraq. atleast Iraq had a status when Saddam was their leader, he may be brutal. but there atleast was stability. he had POWER. see Iraq today, suicide bombings here and there, ethnich tension here and there, separatists here and there, terrorists here and there.

Saddam was a man of his word. he always was with us against the pkk and hadn't problem with us raiding into North-Iraq to take out terrorists. now "buhuuuu Turkey is bombing our country please UN make them stop"!
 
.
i know it might sound a bit prejudiced and hatred calling, but... Saddam was thousand times better than this "politicians" we see in todays Iraq. atleast Iraq had a status when Saddam was their leader, he may be brutal. but there atleast was stability. he had POWER. see Iraq today, suicide bombings here and there, ethnich tension here and there, separatists here and there, terrorists here and there.

Saddam was a man of his word. he always was with us against the pkk and hadn't problem with us raiding into North-Iraq to take out terrorists. now "buhuuuu Turkey is bombing our country please UN make them stop"!

Even though Saddam invaded Saudi Arabia many here still see him as a hero. Iraq needs tough people read on "Al-Hajjaj bin Yousef Al-Thaqafi" I am Thaqafi by the way :)
 
.
Saddam never tolerated separatist movements on its soils, never allowed them to launch attacks against Turkiye from its soil, he gave permission to Taf to cross borders against terrorists whenever needed! Barzani, Talabani, Maliki and Assad always did exactly opposite, armed, trained and feed them against us also provided them shelter.
 
.
Saddam invaded Iran, tried to annex parts of it and subjugate rest, but he failed. Yet his failure caused the death of hundreds of thousands of people, and many more injured (some with poison gas).

Imagine if Saddam had done the same to Turkey, and Iranians came to praise Saddam on this forum. How would Turks feel ?

Iraqi Kurds and Shias don't seem to long for Saddam to come back. Whatever Maliki is, the people can replace him next election, if he is disliked. Much of the current mayhem in Iraq is caused by suicide bombers who blow up Shiite civilians. Some of them cross the border from Saudi Arabia.
 
.
Friend i'm not praising him, just from our pov saying it was much better for us when he was in charge because the border areas were clean from terrorists and safe.. Iraq also had security and stability and most important he didnt use terrorist against us unlike the new ones! Not praising Saddams personaility or whatever he did to others at all!
 
.
Saddam invaded Iran, tried to annex parts of it and subjugate rest, but he failed. Yet his failure caused the death of hundreds of thousands of people, and many more injured (some with poison gas).

Imagine if Saddam had done the same to Turkey, and Iranians came to praise Saddam on this forum. How would Turks feel ?

Iraqi Kurds and Shias don't seem to long for Saddam to come back. Whatever Maliki is, the people can replace him next election, if he is disliked. Much of the current mayhem in Iraq is caused by suicide bombers who blow up Shiite civilians. Some of them cross the border from Saudi Arabia.

we're not praising, no no no...

we are just saying that in our perspective, he did a lot of good things for us. he didn't ***** about us bombing Northern Iraq, he helped us fighting pkk scumbags. he put down separatist movements...

what he did against Iran is indeed bad and was wrong. but it's those small details that made life in eastern parts of Turkey much more safer to live in some years back than it was now.

look at Iraq now, what a mess. a beautifull country ruined by some corrupted politicians. Sunni Shia fight etc. suicide bombings and the list goes on!

Saddam was actually pro Turkey, we did kind of "help" him get "rid" of Kurds. todays government ***** and moan as soon as our jets take of to bomb terrorist camps. they dont help us in getting rid of them, Saddam did. they dont co operate with us in any way. Saddam did etc...

i hope you get it. i dont talk about what he did against Iranians. i talk about how he made the country more stabile and kept terrorists under a iron hand!
 
.
Saddam was actually pro Turkey, we did kind of "help" him get "rid" of Kurds. todays government ***** and moan as soon as our jets take of to bomb terrorist camps. they dont help us in getting rid of them, Saddam did. they dont co operate with us in any way. Saddam did etc...

i hope you get it. i dont talk about what he did against Iranians. i talk about how he made the country more stabile and kept terrorists under a iron hand!
You are comparing apples and oranges. Instability in any country brings such problems to neighbors, but that doesn't give us a right to defend a dictator whom massacred thousands of innocent Kurdish and Iraqi civilians. American invasion of Iraq was a terrible terrible thing, but we really don't have to pick a lesser evil do we?
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom