A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
James Poulos ·
February 4, 2012 at 8:16pm
So, Claire. The National is now running analysts' commentaries floating a joint Turkish-Jordanian-Gulf intervention in Syria, meaning a Turkish intervention. None less than Anne-Marie Slaughter says this is "a realistic scenario." Obviously this is about the last possible thing the Russians would want. (Well, second last.) But Turkey is, in spite of it all, in a position of relative strength and freedom of operation.
And so: how likely do you judge such an eventuality to be? If at all likely, how soon?
- Comment (27)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Apr '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Shale gas and oil. A carrot.
"This is taking place elsewhere, too. Geologists tell us there is more shale in MENA (Middle East and North Africa) countries than anywhere else in the world.
Saudi Arabia had ignored its natural gas until recently. Now, that kingdom is involved in an energetic pursuit of both freestanding gas and shale.
In addition to the Saudis, substantial shale gas is expected elsewhere in the Middle East – especially Syria, Iraq and Jordan."
http://www.oilvoice.com/n/Agris_Reports_3D_Seismic_Significantly_Upgrades_Syrian_Resource_Potential/09cac2d55.aspx
Apr '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Tartus - an obstacle.
"Tartus hosts a Soviet-era naval supply and maintenance base, under a 1971 agreement with Syria, which is still staffed by Russian naval personnel. The base was established during the Cold War to support the Soviet Navy's fleet in the Mediterranean Sea."
"Since 2009, Russia has been renovating the Tartus naval base and dredging the port to allow access for its larger naval vessels."
In 2009, RIA Novosti reported that the base would be made fully operational to support anti-piracy operations. It would also support a Russian naval presence in the Mediterranean as a base for "guided-missile cruisers and even aircraft carriers".
In late November 2011, Pravda and Reuters announced that a naval flotilla led by the aircraft carrier Kuznetsov was on its way to the naval base in Tartus as a show of support for the al-Assad regime."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartus
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Oh, come on. The Turks aren't that stupid.
Sure! They're just going to send in their kids in to take casualties like that. There wouldn't be any problem if Assad popped one of those Scuds or SS-21s--or perhaps a few hundred--into a Turkish population center, after all, and probably all that talk about chemical weapons is just gossip, right? Nothing like the clash and sting of a ground war against a desperate, ruthless enemy armed by Russia and an even more desperate Iran--not if you're a fearless Turk!
The stereotype of the Turk as all brawn, no brain, is not quite true, James. They want to send their kids into that about as much as Americans do.
And don't forget that a significant portion of Turkey's military leadership is in jail.
Oct '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Maybe a rerun of the GWB use of Ethiopia to invade Somalia ? US promise loads of money, enough patriots and drone strikes to nullify the Scuds and other rockets ?
I already imagine the Damascus Bob doing the briefing to foreign journalists : ''Turkey is waging a genocidal, criminal and illegal war ! No other proof required that their Generals are running it from their jail cells.''
Edited on February 5, 2012 at 12:09amApr '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
So that is a No, I take it. To be honest I'm not surprised. The best you can expect on the level of intervention in Syria is something akin to Kosovo, Lybia and first weeks of Afghanistan...western air support for local fighters, maybe some special forces...that is the absolute best. I don't think any Western nation wants to have "boots on the ground" in Syria.
May '10
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Claire Berlinski, Ed.:
And don't forget that a significant portion of Turkey's military leadership is in jail.
One would think that would make Turkey more inclined to foolish strategies, not less.
Apr '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Aaron Miller
Claire Berlinski, Ed.:
And don't forget that a significant portion of Turkey's military leadership is in jail.
One would think that would make Turkey more inclined to foolish strategies, not less. · 8 minutes ago
Particularly foolish strategies of support for co-religionists. A new Sunni fundamentalist neighbor would be a big deal for Turkey. Much more comfortable if they're friends. Plus, the Turks are always kinda keen to invade cross-border strongholds of domestic anti-turkish sentiment.
On the other hand, going too far in that direction would be uncomfortable for relations with Iraq and Iran. It's hard to tell how atrocities will shape public opinion; obviously they're not going in now, but in a week's time things may be different. A couple of really youtubable horrors and the world might sit up.
Nov '10
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
They wouldn't empower the Turk military leaders into this sort of regime-change operation (assuming that's what it comes to). After all, that's what the current imprisonment and demonizing of military leadership in Turkey today is all about: cutting from under their feet the military's moral authority to intervene in matters of state. Historically the military have been seen as the "guardians of the constitution" and have intervened in Turkish politics before when leadership went rogue -- and by "rogue" it is meant that they violated the strictly secular aspects of the constitution -- Kemalism. The current mildly (or covertly more strongly) islamist regime understands what a threat this would be, and they have worked tirelessly for the past few years to keep the military on the defensive and in a weakened state by defaming its leadership and, in some cases eliminating them by putting them in jail. It is unlikely they will hand the military the authority to intervene in another country's affairs.
Dec '10
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
These objections are infantile. Once the Syrian regime is broken nothing that will come after it will be worse and in all likelyhood will be much better.
Smashing the regime is much easier then is presented here. I see no down side to doing just that.
The time for talk and inaction is over.
Jim
Sep '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
You mean you disagree.
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Well, no, only one intervention ('97) had much to do with secularism as you'd think of it; the others were vastly more complicated affairs. It's even debatable whether '97 had much to do with secularism; there's still quite a bit of speculation that the target wasn't Erbakan, but Ciller.
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Gaby Charing
You mean you disagree. · 9 minutes ago
I don't know whether that's what he meant, but if it is, indeed, on Ricochet we encourage people to express this thought in the more tactful way that Gaby has suggested.
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
James Gawron:
Smashing the regime is much easier then is presented here. I see no down side to doing just that.
Jim, I don't think it will be easy at all, and I can see many down sides. I think it's prudence to consider them all very carefully.
Aug '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
The article is pure science fiction. Nothing short of a repeat of Hama 1982 will motivate anyone to take any military action, and even then I'm not so sure.
Personally, I'm saddened by the loss of life, but I have grave doubts that the overthrow of Assad will (in the long run) lead to any improvement in the lives of the average Syrian, nor will it improve the regional situation. The one thing I agree with in the article is "better the devil you know".
And before you remind me that Assad has brutally killed thousands of his own citizens, none of this would have happened if the events in Tunisia & Egypt wouldn't have given them false hope. Live free or die is fine, as long as the struggle for freedom has an endgame that has at least the promise of a positive outcome.
The Arab Spring begat the Islamic Tsunami, we've known this for a while now. Maybe we should be looking for a way to save Assad AND offer Syrians some improvement in their situation (more sci-fi I guess)
I hope I'm wrong (wouldn't be the first time).
Apr '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Partial disagreement, Claire. I think it would be relatively easy to topple Assad without boots on the ground, but is it worth it, when so many outcomes are no better than the current situation?
Isn't Syria historically in the French sphere of influence? What do the French think?
(Thank you for the poem. I wish I was smart enough to appreciate it.)
Dec '10
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
Once again, you are over thinking this. Syria is no Iran and would fall rapidly. With the incredible brutality of the Regime evident to all (inside the country and outside), the people will rise and welcome their LIBERATORS.
There is a time for cynicism & reserve and a time to take ACTION.
Edited on February 5, 2012 at 12:55pmAug '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
James Gawron: Once again, you are over thinking this. Syria is no Iran and would fall rapidly. With the incredible brutality of the Regime evident to all (inside the country and outside), the people will rise and welcome their LIBERATORS.
There is a time for cynicism & reserve and a time to take ACTION. · 1 minute ago
Edited 0 minutes ago
I honestly think you are being a bit naive, and I mean that with all due respect. The people may welcome their liberators, but there are zero guarantees that anything good will materialize from the vacuum that the removal of Assad will leave behind. How is Syria going to magically transition from totalitarian hell to liberal democracy? Its a fantasy.
Dec '10
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
jonorose
James Gawron: Once again, you are over thinking this. Syria is no Iran and would fall rapidly. With the incredible brutality of the Regime evident to all (inside the country and outside), the people will rise and welcome their LIBERATORS.
There is a time for cynicism & reserve and a time to take ACTION. · 1 minute ago
Edited 0 minutes ago
I honestly think you are being a bit naive, and I mean that with all due respect. The people may welcome their liberators, but there are zero guarantees... · 12 minutes ago
There are never guarantees. The only problem with Bush in Iraq was that after "Shock and Awe" he waited years to bring on the "Surge".
If we learn from the past rather then whine about it we will be Victorious. Of course, some are afraid of victory. Here's an old Barry Goldwater quote that might help.
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Tolerance in the face of tyranny is no virtue."
Edited on February 5, 2012 at 1:32pmAug '11
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
James Gawron
There are never guarantees. The only problem with Bush in Iraq was that after "Shock and Awe" he waited years to bring on the "Surge".
If we learn from the past rather then whine about it we will be Victorious. Of course, some are afraid of victory. Here's an old Barry Goldwater quote that might help.
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Tolerance in the face of tyranny is no virtue." · 4 minutes ago
Edited 0 minutes ago
Only problem is, I have to live with the consequences (its about 70km as the crow flies from where I sit right now in the North of Israel to the Syrian border)
Re: A Question for Claire: Ottomania?
That's two of us. And whether or not people further away feel it as intensely as we do, it's everyone.
Here's some good reporting, in the sense that the reporter at least seems to be trying to present the context and to let the reader know what he doesn't know.