Do we want to meet the publics expectations and organize an effective fight against the PKK? Do we prefer to crush the PKK once and for all instead of making do with empty words and slogans? Do we want to counteract the Armenian genocide allegations instead of giving in to them? Do we really want to understand our public? Then lets put our own house in order first
The first condition of an effective fight against the PKK is to put our own house in order. Let's summarize what this means. As faithful readers of this column know, I repeatedly write that we are the main reason why the fight against the PKK fails. I have mentioned the lack of dialogue and coordination between state institutions. The military has its own policy and attitude. Ankara used to have its own policy (during Sezer's term). The National Intelligence Organization (MIT) and the police have their own different thoughts. The government has another approach altogether.
It is possible. Each institution can embrace a different policy. However, what counts is to be able to melt all these different approaches in a single pot. State institutions have to gather around a table to hear each other's different views before the political authority makes a decision. What we had until a couple of days ago, however, was a complete dialogue of the deaf.
There were days when the chief of staff blamed the government. We fight without official permission, he said. The next day, the prime minister put the blame on the military. His answer was, all you had to do was ask for it.
In other words, we moved in chaotic conditions.
In fear of losing votes, politicians have let the military fight against terror since 1980. They avoided taking responsibility. They took the easy way out. However, the military could only deal with one aspect of this fight (armed fight), and that's what they did. They couldn't have done anything else.
Turkey was active as long as there was terror. When terror stopped (1999-2006), Turkey forgot all about it. The PKK grabbed us by the neck and knocked us about. Isn't it also true of the current situation?
The political aspect of the issue was abandoned. The economic aspect wasn't considered enough. The cultural aspect wasn't even considered.
That is the reason I say, we should first put our own house in order. There is no other way out, anyway. There is not other way of dealing with terror.
General Baþbuð always said, don't leave this issue to us, we can't deal with it alone. He also listed what should be done. He did and said what the politicians should have.
Nobody moved a finger. It is time to change this state of affairs.
We cannot put all the blame on the AKP, either. We are talking about a disruption of 20 years.
Come, let's make a beginning of the latest developments and open a new page.
It is time for political authorities to take the responsibility of putting our house in order. If we can't manage to do this now, we shall be having the same conversation 20 years later.
***
Aren't we really responsible for the U.S. decision on Armenians
Another development was the approval of the Armenian Genocide Project by the foreign affairs commission of the U.S. House of Representatives.
The same fight has been going on for years. Around this time each year, Armenians appeal to the American Congress. Turkey rebels and threatens and puts pressure on Washington. Then the U.S. administration stops Armenians.
Not this time, though.
This time, the Armenians caught such a favorable conjuncture that the Bush administration was unable to stop them.
I've written this before.
The approval of this project by the House of Representatives has no binding effect. Nevertheless, it will cost Turkey a great loss in prestige. Armenian genocide allegations will gain more credibility. Other parliaments that hadn't approved the project till now will be affected. They won't be able to stand the Armenian pressure.
So, who's to blame? Is it the Bush administration that made enormous efforts to stand by Turkey? Can it be the EU? No.
There are many reasons for this outcome, but we have the greatest responsibility. Armenians have been as industrious as bees for almost 50 years. They explain their point of view to the world and get it accepted.
What have we done? Almost nothing. Apart from a few books and a few conferences, Turkey did nothing. For years, we took refuge in the fact that We are NATO members. Nobody can harm us. When that stopped working, we began blackmailing our friends.
We never launched an effective campaign to justify our side of the story. We even silenced the diverse voices among us. We even failed to stand up for our own Armenians.
We now have to bear the consequences of our own acts.
Come let's put first our own house in order in this issue, too. We can't leave the AKP holding the bill. Everybody has to chip in to pay this 50-year old expense.
Let's turn the page and make a new beginning. Let's stop blaming others and get down to work.
#1
That is the reason I say, we should first put our own house in order. There is no other way out, anyway. There is not [an]other way of dealing with terror.
This is one of those, "I didn't know my bullshit meter hadda siren" moments.
We never launched an effective campaign to justify our side of the story. We even silenced the diverse voices among us. We even failed to stand up for our own Armenians.
Mister Proof, please have the pleasure of meeting Mister Pudding. I also have to add that Turkey's genocide isn't yet over. This is merely an interregnum as their Muslim population refocuses its hostility upon a new victim du jour. I truly doubt it's even possible to separate Islam and genocide. It's their effing national sport.
Jason Bourke and the Guardian notice what's happening in Wazoo.
An Australian died when his armoured vehicle was hit by a massive remote-detonated mine, the 192nd coalition soldier killed this year in Afghanistan. The death of David Pearce, 41, made this year the bloodiest for foreign soldiers deployed in Afghanistan since the days of the Soviet occupation. The number of Afghan civilians who have died in the fighting this year is already higher than that for any year since the vicious civil war that tore the country apart in the early Nineties.
Just to put things in perspective, the Soviets lost about 14,000 dead over 9 years of Afghanistan operations. (There were just under 500,000 non-fatal casualties.) That gave them a burn rate of about 130 deaders a month.
Jalaluddin Haqqani held Miram Shah as a personal fiefdom for decades, building a mosque and a huge religious school on its outskirts. Haqqani, a senior cleric, or maulvi, in the Deobandi school of Islam, is now old and ailing - some intelligence sources believe him to be dead -
Last rumor I saw on him was that he'd kicked it of hepatitis.
but his son, Sirajuddin Haqqani, has taken over and is as active as his father ever was. If anyone is going to be president of this new state it is he.
al-Guardian is talking about the nascent state of Pashtunistan.
Little is known about Sirajuddin Haqqani. According to Brigadier Shah, the Pakistani army is 'currently fighting blindfold', and western intelligence agencies admit a 'lack of visibility' in the tribal areas. However, all believe that Haqqani is the dominant figure among the warlords hacking out their fiefdoms in the tribal areas. '[Sirajuddin Haqqani] is at the top of the food chain,' said one western military official in Islamabad. 'He's one of the few people everyone listens to.' Sources told The Observer that it was Haqqani who, four weeks ago, brought three different warlords together to provide a big enough force to take on the Pakistani army around Mir Ali.
But Haqqani, who is believed to be in his forties, has another key role to play. He has inherited the influence his father built over 20 years well beyond the tribal zones of Pakistan. That influence stretches across eastern Afghanistan as far as Ghazni and even into Uruzgan, where the Australian soldier was killed last week. Jalaluddin Haqqani and his son have been able to draw together a complex web of links of allegiance.
Another reason the Haqqani dynasty is so powerful is its wealth. This allows them to buy the loyalty that their religious and jihadi credentials do not win them. That money comes from smuggling opium, weapons and timber out of Afghanistan as well as from quasi-legitimate businesses. It also comes in direct donations from backers in Gulf Arab states such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and from indirect donations via the scores of Islamic charities which gather the 10 per cent zakat levy that every devout Muslim gives to religious causes.
This article starring:
JALALUDIN HAQQANI
Taliban
SIRAJUDIN HAQQANI
Taliban
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So what exactly would we do if the Taliban movement in Pakistan, took out buildings on American soil? Would we occupy our Pakistan "ally" in the GWOT? Would we sit back and let Mushy take care of it?
In Olso Friday, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was not awarded to the Burmese monks whose defiance against, and brutalization at the hands of, the country's military junta in recent weeks captured the attention of the Free World.
The prize was also not awarded to Morgan Tsvangirai, Arthur Mutambara and other Zimbabwe opposition leaders who were arrested and in some cases beaten by police earlier this year while protesting peacefully against dictator Robert Mugabe.
Or to Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Catholic priest in Vietnam arrested this year and sentenced to eight years in prison for helping the pro-democracy group Block 8406.
Or to Wajeha al-Huwaider and Fawzia al-Uyyouni, co-founders of the League of Demanders of Women's Right to Drive Cars in Saudi Arabia, who are waging a modest struggle with grand ambitions to secure basic rights for women in that Muslim country.
Or to Colombian President Àlvaro Uribe, who has fought tirelessly to end the violence wrought by left-wing terrorists and drug lords in his country.
Or to Garry Kasparov and the several hundred Russians who were arrested in April, and are continually harassed, for resisting President Vladimir Putin's slide toward authoritarian rule.
Or to the people of Iraq, who bravely work to rebuild and reunite their country amid constant threats to themselves and their families from terrorists who deliberately target civilians. . . .
Many, many more at he link.
These men and women put their own lives and livelihoods at risk by working to rid the world of violence and oppression. Let us hope they survive the coming year so that the Nobel Prize Committee might consider them for the 2008 award.
Posted by: Mike ||
10/14/2007 08:13 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Bah Humbug... did they invent the Internet?
Posted by: john frum ||
10/14/2007 9:20 Comments ||
Top||
#2
It's nice to see that the Euro Nobel elites have finally evolved to "Dancing with Stars". Now just move it to the entertainment section were it belongs, along with Britney, and Oprah, and ....
#4
The only consolation is that Gore had to share his prize with the UN. Any sane person knows that a prize shared with such a corrupt organization is tainted beyond redemption. Of course, none of that will prevent Gore from viewing his award as a pinnacle achievement, whichin a large number of respectsis actually quite fitting. Gore isn't fit to polish the shoes of those listed above with the oil from his nose.
Every major daily paper in New York took note of President Bush's decision to bestow the first Medal of Honor of Operation Enduring Freedom on Navy SEAL Lt. Michael Murphy - a Long Islander who gave his life for his country and his fellow SEALs.
Every paper but one, that is.
And it shouldn't be particularly hard to guess which one.
By now, most folks know exactly how much The New York Times despises the U.S. military. How it detests any mission that involves U.S. troops - whether to protect Americans by killing terrorists or to help stave off a bloodbath in the Middle East.
How the paper works tirelessly to promote its anti-war, anti-military agenda - even in its supposedly objective news pages.
So while Bush's announcement merited stories and appreciative editorials in The Post, The New York Sun, the Daily News and even the front page of liberal Newsday, it shouldn't be all that surprising that the Times didn't publish a single word about Murphy's well-deserved honor.
What did the paper of record focus on yesterday? No fewer than three stories reported on how Americans had killed innocent Iraqi civilians.
Regarding the war, of course, the Times' "coverage" was pernicious long before the fighting began.
Since then, it has focused obsessively on the mistakes and sins of American GIs (Abu Ghraib, anyone?) - and rarely has it played up U.S. victories.
Indeed, it would be hard to cite a news outlet more responsible for sapping U.S. morale - and emboldening America's enemies - than the Times.
But Murphy was a New Yorker.
He served with unusual valor and distinction in Afghanistan.
When Taliban militants ambushed his four-man team in 2005, he risked his life scrambling to an open spot to radio for help. He got his call through, but was later killed in the battle. Surely even editors at the Times could have had the heart to report - if not honor - such courage and self-sacrifice.
Unless, of course, they're so blinded by their disdain for America's fighting men and women and their missions that they just can't muster the decency to do so.
That must be it.
You might recall that many liberal/progressive types blame the Iraq war for, amongst other things, causing us to lose our focus on Afghanistan and al-Qaeda. We should be putting more troops into Afghanistan, they say. But what they say and what they really support are two different things.
You might also recall that the NYT called Afghanistan another 'Vietnam' just a week before Mazar-al-Sharif, and then Kabul, fell in early 2002. The Times has never supported anything in our response to the WoT that required military force, and they've gone out of their way to denigrate our military people. Pinchy pro'ly still prefers to think of himself as a 'world' citizen, not an American one.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11133 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ill-informed - a person who gets their news from the New York Times.
#3
While the remaining Times readers go farther back into their cave of ignorance and bliss.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/14/2007 9:59 Comments ||
Top||
#4
At this point I don't think that they are hurting themselves much. They seem to have dwindled down to a core readership that WANTS to hear about how badly we are losing in the ME.
#5
Yes, Bobby, but they'll point out they are "Plato's" caves, just to make sure we understand their intellectual authority hoping we don't notice that they're enthralled with the shadows.
#8
Local Newpaper MY SAN ANTONIO > end of article on immigration issue > "Iff you're reading this article, THANK A TEACHER; Iff you're reading this article in ENGLISH, THANK A VETERAN/SERVICEMEMBER".
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
