http://www.al-monitor.com/
Ankara's Mosul miscalculation
After
the tension that followed Turkey shooting down a Russian jet, Turkey is
now caught up in a controversy with its other critical neighbor, Iraq.
When the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) sent soldiers accompanied by tanks
to the camp at Bashiqa,
20 kilometers (12 miles) from Mosul, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider
al-Abadi issued an ultimatum for Turkish troops to leave within 48
hours. He said Iraq will consider all options, including turning to the
Security Council, should Turkey fail to withdraw. Iraqi Defense Minister
Khaled al-Obeidi said that about 1,000 soldiers had been sent without
informing Baghdad, too many for a training mission.
Summary⎙ Print Even Turkmens are unhappy with Turkey’s moves in Mosul, and Ankara may have made a serious misjudgment.
Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu responded with a letter to Abadi saying Turkey will suspend sending troops to Bashiqa until
the Iraqi government’s concerns are addressed. But the letter did not
yield results. Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim Jaafari said that the time
was running out and repeated the warning that Iraq would turn to the UN
if Turkey doesn’t withdraw its troops. Then the TSK announced that it
had halted the dispatch of a new 350-strong unit waiting at the border,
but 600 troops at Bashiqa now will not be withdrawn.
The
crisis was brought about by a lack of coordination. The Iraqi
government requires that all military assistance against the Islamic
State go through Baghdad in coordination with the Ministry of Defense.
The United States, which has defense and cooperation agreements with
Iraq, is extremely careful to respect the Iraqi conditions.
There are several reasons Turkey tends to commit careless mistakes in Iraq.
A
governmental vacuum in northern Iraq since 1991 has allowed Turkey to
boost its influence in the region. The TSK's soldiers gained operational
experience while deployed against the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). The
Turkish military presence in various locations, including Sulaimaniyah
and Erbil, was politically linked to Turkey’s wish to protect Turkmens
in the region.
After
the legal establishment of the Kurdistan Regional Government, Turkey’s
military presence continued. Turkey claims it is at Bashiqa with the
approval of Baghdad to train Hashd al Watani set up by former Mosul
Governor Atheel Nujaifi and the peshmerga forces, but a deployment
of 1,000 soldiers and 25 tanks gives the impression that the training
camp has been turned into an operational base.
What could Turkey be hoping to achieve by reinforcements it wanted to send?
Following
the downing of its plane, Russia has been targeting Turkey’s Syria
plans, mainly by restricting the TSK’s operational capacity in the area
between Aleppo and Turkey currently controlled by the opposition. In
response, Ankara wants to have a presence in Mosul so as not to be
totally sidelined in the Middle East game. Turkey’s focus on Mosul aims
to deter the PKK forces deployed in the area alongside the peshmerga to
liberate the Yazidi town of Sinjar from the Islamic State (IS).
In
Ankara, there are increasing sentiments in the ruling party to restore
the National Pact borders. The neo-Ottomans of the party want to be
among forces liberating Mosul and thus restore their lost influence in
the region. Ankara also wants to guarantee the future of oil agreements
made with the Kurdish administration.
Ankara
is also making a strategic choice. Turkey opposes the entry into Mosul
of the Hashd al-Shaabi forces, which are on Baghdad's payroll and
support Sunni-dominated Hashd al Watani, but backs its narrative with
careless and baseless claims. For example, Ankara says, “Hashd al-Shaabi
is fully Shiite and guided by Iran.” Those who say this are forgetting
that the Turkmens Turkey is supposed to be protecting have fought
alongside Hashd al-Shaabi. True, Hashd al-Shaabi was set up by a fatwa
from Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, but it became a legal force
attached to the Prime Ministry. Hashd al Shabi which is currently the
most effective field element against ISIS in Iraq includes Sunni
units. Those who mutter "Shiites must not enter Mosul" forget that 65%
of the population of Iraq is Shiite. Iran’s influence is also
exaggerated.
Turkmens
who spoke to Al-Monitor were critical of Turkey and Nujaifi because of
his hostility to the central government that tolerated IS. Turkey has
been working with the wrong people in Mosul since 2003, they said,
and Mosul cannot be liberated with Nujaifi and the militia he is
leading.
They
also said Turkmens in the ranks of Hashd al-Shaabi have acquired
experience in fighting IS for a year and a half, and ignoring this
resource will only serve IS.
KRG President Massoud Barzani’s administration, although not delighted with the Turkish military presence,
is keeping quiet for the sake of commercial relations with Turkey. The
KRG has no one else to turn to if its relations sour with Baghdad.
At
this juncture, Arab opinions are important. Among Iraqi political
circles, Turkey’s policies are held responsible for the fall of Mosul
and empowerment of IS. Their popular slogan can be best summarized
as, “Mosul will be liberated by all Iraqis. No other power, including
Turkey, has the right to express reservations about Hashd al-Shaabi.”
Two
Iraqi sources explained to Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity why
they can’t depend on Nujaifi, saying, “Iraqi government ordered those
trained at Bashiqa to participate in the Bayci operations. Nujaifi,
though he didn’t have more than 2,000 fighters, wanted additional funds
from the government, claiming he has 8,000-9,000 fighters. The payment
was then stopped.”
Many people ask whether the latest Turkish move has anything to do with joining an operation to liberate Mosul.
According
to Aydin Selcen, Turkey’s former consul general at Erbil, “You can’t
say that 600 soldiers with the new reinforcements will have a bearing on
the military picture on the ground. It will be more fitting to see this
as a political and public relations move.”
Selcen
told Al-Monitor, “This shows that the Bashiqa base is being transformed
from temporary to permanent. This carries a political message to all
parties, like Baghdad, Tehran, Moscow, Washington, Erbil and Kandil. But
it doesn’t mean a display of force to liberate Mosul from IS and that
Turkey will join such an operation in the near term.”
Selcen
added, “After IS captured Mosul — or better to say took it over —
the first thing it did was to erase the Iraq-Syria border to consolidate
two war fronts. Reviewing what has been done in Bashiqa, it is obvious
that training was given on the request of ex-governor Nujaifi with the
consent of the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government that controls the
region and with the knowledge of the US.”
Selcen
warned that Ankara had taken a risky step military and politically,
asking, “Is it worth it? Did we really calculate the consequences of
what we are doing in these circumstances?”
Selcen
concluded by summarizing what he saw as Ankara’s misguided calculations
about Mosul: “Once we used to warn Massoud Barzani to get his act
together and not to dream of ruling Kirkuk. Today Kirkuk oil is flowing
to Turkey’s Ceyhan in the pipeline of the KRG. Now we are telling
[Democratic Union Party] leader Salih Muslim not to lose his head. What
if global forces tomorrow
tell Ankara, ‘Don’t lose your head. Nobody will allow you to take over
Aleppo and Mosul.’ Who is saying that Arabs of Mosul and Aleppo are
waiting for Turks with open arms? How quickly we forgot the suicide
attack against our Baghdad embassy on Oct. 14, 2003, and our special
forces team that was brutally murdered in Mosul on Dec. 17, 2004.”
Turkey’s
military presence in Iraq has suddenly become a source of dispute
because of tensions with Baghdad. This can only complicate the Mosul
issue, while increasing the possibility of hostilities against Turkish
forces there.
Read more: http://www.al-monitor.
No comments:
Post a Comment