Turkey

[njfishwatchTurkey&Isr]

Turkey on tenterhooks
ANKARA (Reuters)
Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan weighs presidency move

Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan is keeping Turks guessing about whether he will run for president, but fears his bid could hurt his party’s prospects in a parliamentary election could force him to forgo the top job.
Erdogan, Turkey’s most charismatic and popular politician, has said his ruling centre-right AK Party will name its candidate for the May presidential election only in mid-April.
President Ahmet Necdet Sezer’s seven-year tenure ends on May 16.
“Erdogan wants the top job, but he fears this would divide his party and indeed the nation,” said Suat Kiniklioglu, analyst at the Ankara-based German Marshall Fund of the United States.
“His top priority is his party’s success. If he decides that running for president puts this in jeopardy, he won’t run. Why become president if you then lose your parliamentary majority?” Turkey must hold a parliamentary election by November. The AK Party is tipped to win the most seats again but it may fall short of a majority and be forced to ally with a smaller party, especially without Erdogan’s vigorous leadership.
Erdogan’s chances of winning a presidential election would be high. His party has a big majority in parliament, which chooses the president.
But Turkey’s secular elite, including army generals, oppose Erdogan, a former Islamist, becoming head of state. They fear he would try to undermine the division between state and religion and are also unhappy that his wife wears the Muslim headscarf.
Secularists also fear Erdogan might try to change the constitution, possibly bolstering the president’s powers.
Erdogan denies any Islamist agenda and his AK Party has proven pragmatic and pro-Western in office, presiding over the launch of EU accession talks, human rights reforms and strong economic growth since sweeping to power in November 2002.
DANGERS That has not stopped his detractors. The anti-government Cumhuriyet daily is running a campaign saying an Erdogan presidency could turn the clock back 100 years in Turkey.
The main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) has threatened to boycott the parliamentary vote if Erdogan stands and says it would have legal grounds to contest his election.
An ex-speaker of parliament says Erdogan’s election could be ruled invalid because of a criminal conviction he received in the late 1990s for reading an Islamist poem.
Turkey’s business elite is also jittery, though it has not publicly urged Erdogan not to stand.
“The president should be a conciliatory figure backed by all sections of society,” Arzuhan Dogan Yalcindag, head of Turkey’s main business lobby TUSIAD, said on Wednesday in Istanbul.
Behind these voices is the brooding presence of the army, ultimate guardian of Turkey’s secular order, which ousted an elected government it deemed too Islamist as recently as 1997.


...

http://www.bahraintribune.com/ArticleDe ... eId=146731

[Exit40]

Angry With Iraqi Kurdish Leader, Turkey Complains to US
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 4-9-2007 13:41:6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(AFP) -- Turkey has complained to the United States over Iraqi Kurdish leader Massud Barzani after he reportedly threatened to interfere in Ankara's affairs if it continued to oppose Kurdish claims on the oil-rich city of Kirkuk, officials said Monday.

Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul "conveyed our sensitivities" to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in a telephone conversation at the weekend, a senior diplomat told AFP.

"A leader like Barzani, or any reasonable person should avoid statements that can open rifts between the two sides," the diplomat said.

Asked by reporters Monday what Turkey's response to Barzani would be, Gul only said: "You will see."

The Turkish media quoted Barzani, head of the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq, as saying that they would meddle in Turkey's already restive, predominantly-Kurdish southeast if Ankara continued to oppose Iraqi Kurdish ambitions to attach Kirkuk to their region.

Turkey says a referendum on Kirkuk's future status, scheduled to be held by the year-end, should be postponed, arguing that thousands of Kurds have been moved into the city to change its demography.

Kirkuk is also home to Arabs and Turkmens, a Turkish-speaking community backed by Ankara.

Barzani reportedly said that if Turkey "interferes in Kirkuk over just a few thousand Turkmens, then we will take action regarding the 30 million Kurds in Turkey."

"Barzani's words are extremely disturbing, unacceptable and are considered as a provocation," the English-language Turkish Daily News paper quoted Gul as telling Rice.

Ankara worries that Kurdish control of Kirkuk and its vast oil reserves would embolden what it believes are Kurdish ambitions to break away from Baghdad.

Kurdish independence, it fears, could fuel the two-decade Kurdish separatist insurgency in adjoining southeast Turkey, which has already resulted in more than 37,000 deaths.

Tensions are already high between the two sides over Turkish accusations that Iraqi Kurds tolerate, and even support, thousands of armed Turkish Kurd rebels who have found refuge in the mountains of northern Iraq.

Ankara has threatened a cross-border operation into the region to crack down on the rebel camps if Baghdad and Washington fail to act against them.

Separately, the New Anatolian daily reported Monday that Iraqi Kurdish objections to Istanbul were instrumental in Baghdad's decision to favour the Egyptian city of Sharm el-Sheikh as the venue of a high-level international meeting in early May to discuss the turmoil in Iraq.

http://www.aina.org/news/2007049084106.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

Iraq PM Seeks to Calm Turkey on Kurdish Leader's Remarks
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 4-11-2007 14:39:27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BAGHDAD (Reuters) -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki sought to mollify Ankara on Wednesday after an Iraqi Kurdish leader warned neighbouring Turkey that any interference in northern Iraq would invite retaliatory action.

Massoud Barzani, president of northern Iraq's largely autonomous Kurdish region, angered Turkey with comments he made in a weekend television interview and repeated again on Tuesday at a ceremony in Arbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Barzani warned Ankara that if it interfered in Kurdistan, as it has threatened to do, Iraqi Kurds would interfere in Kurdish cities in Turkey.

Turkey's prime minister said Barzani would "be crushed by his own words". Washington called his comments "unhelpful".

Turkish Kurdish rebels use northern Iraq as a base from which to attack military and civilian targets in Turkey.

Ankara is also worried by what it sees as moves by Iraqi Kurds to build an independent state in northern Iraq, fearing this could reignite separatism among its own Kurdish population.

Maliki, in South Korea on Wednesday as part of an Asian trip, said in a statement issued by his office that Iraq's foreign policy was decided by the government in Baghdad.

"Iraqi foreign policy is represented by the commitment to build the best of relations with its neighbours and non-interference in their internal affairs and by not allowing these countries to interfere in Iraq's internal affairs," he said.

"NO THREATS"

Ankara has handed a diplomatic protest note to the Iraqi government over Barzani's comments.

Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul reaffirmed his country's right, under international law, to take its own action if need be against the Kurdish rebels hiding in Iraq, a tacit reference to possible military intervention.

"We're not making threats or indulging in bravado. We are simply making clear that events have come to a very dangerous point," Gul told reporters in Ankara.

"Turkey has no secret agenda in Iraq."

Foreign Ministry spokesman Levent Bilman, asked whether Turkey was ready to send troops into Iraq, declined to comment, saying only that Ankara expected "decisive and urgent" steps from Baghdad against the rebels.

Bilman also declined to confirm a report in the Turkish daily Radikal that Ankara was considering shutting its main border gate with Iraq and banning Iraqi aircraft from using Turkish airspace if Baghdad fails to act against the rebels.

Political analysts say Turkey is very unlikely to mount a full-scale invasion of northern Iraq but says the government, facing elections this year, is under pressure to take some limited action, possibly cross-border commando raids or air strikes against rebel positions inside Iraq.

Turkey is especially worried that Iraqi Kurds will wrest control of the oil-rich but multi-ethnic Iraqi city of Kirkuk after a referendum on the city's status due by the end of 2007, turning it into the capital of a new state.

http://www.aina.org/news/2007041193927.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

EU Urges Peaceful Solution to Turkey-Iraq Problems
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 4-13-2007 14:47:23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Commission urged EU candidate Turkey and Iraq on Friday to settle differences peacefully after Turkey's top general called for a military operation to quash Turkish Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq.

Diplomats said pro-Turkish European governments had made clear privately to Ankara that armed action in northern Iraq would give its critics in the European Union ammunition to try to block or further slow its accession process.

"Our hope and the interest of all involved is that possible differences are dealt with in a peaceful and constructive manner," the EU executive's spokeswoman on enlargement, Krisztina Nagy, told a news briefing.

She declined to comment directly on a statement by armed forces chief of staff General Yasar Buyukanit at a rare news conference on Thursday that "from the military point of view, a (military) operation in northern Iraq must be made".

Buyukanit added that the military had not asked Turkey's parliament to authorise a cross-border operation.

Nagy said Brussels was following the situation closely.

"The stability of Iraq is in our common interest and the EU recognises the constructive role Turkey plays in the area, and in this context it is important that Turkey continues to play such a constructive role," she said.

The EU requires candidate countries to resolve disputes with their neighbours peacefully, and to maintain civilian control over the military.

Another EU official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said of Buyukanit's comments: "This is not the type of statement that goes in line with the candidacy process."

US worried too

EU diplomats acknowledge Turkey has a genuine problem with fighters of the outlawed separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), believed to operate from rear bases in the mountainous Kurdish region of northern Iraq.

The PKK has attacked tourist targets and security forces in Turkey since ending a truce last year.

But an EU official said: "The position of the EU has always been to preserve the territorial integrity of Iraq."

The EU reaction was similar to that of the United States. In a sign of concern, the State Department said US Assistant Secretary of State Dan Fried telephoned the Turkish ambassador in Washington on Thursday to urge Turkey to work with Iraq to resolve the matter amicably.

EU diplomats ascribed Buyukanit's comments partly to domestic tensions over a looming presidential election. But they said Turkey was not the only country with an election.

French presidential frontrunner Nicolas Sarkozy has spelled out his opposition to Turkish membership. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has advocated a "privileged partnership" instead, although her government has kept the accession talks going during its current EU presidency.

Senior Turkish officials acknowledge that the strategic objective of joining the Union is a factor in the government's policy-making on the northern Iraq problem.

Asked whether military action in northern Iraq could harm Ankara's EU candidacy, chief Turkish negotiator Ali Babacan said in Brussels in February: "What you ask is not an easy question to say 'yes' or 'no'. EU member states know our sensitivities."

But after the EU suspended talks on eight policy areas last December to sanction Turkey for failing to open its ports and airports to traffic from Cyprus, its hold over Turkish policy may be weaker.

http://www.aina.org/news/2007041394723.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

Iraqi Kurds play with Turkish fire
By M K Bhadrakumar

A controversial interview with Iraqi Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani by Al-Arabiya television last weekend may convey a superficial impression that events in northern Iraq could be spinning beyond the control of the United States.

Barzani has always been outspoken in asserting the Kurdish people's rights of national self-determination, but this time he was out of line, threatening that he would stoke the fires of Kurdish sub-nationalism within Turkey.

In Ankara's tense political climate in the run-up to a controversial presidential election scheduled for May-June, Barzani touched raw nerves that might well come to impact on the outcome of the election itself. Meanwhile, several questions arise to which there are no easy answers. The key question is, did anyone prod Barzani to speak?

Washington has scurried to cool tempers. Indeed, Turks don't like being threatened, and Barzani has done it in full view of the Arab Middle East that formed part of the proud history of the Ottomans. Also, it was the second time within the week that Turkish pride took a blow. Earlier, Baghdad announced, no doubt with Washington's prior consent, that the venue of a meeting of foreign ministers for a conference on Iraq on May 3-4 would be Cairo, and not Istanbul as originally planned.

Barzani gave the interview on February 28, but for some obscure reason it was broadcast six weeks later, on April 6. But then, coincidence or not, last week Turkish media reported that Washington was getting increasingly annoyed by Turkey's growing proximity ("strategic cooperation") with Iran. Was Barzani capitalizing on the contradictions in Turkish-US relations? Finally, there are the mysterious goings-on between Barzani and Israeli operatives. In his interview, Barzani made exceptionally friendly references to Israel.

Israel, of course, has an old connection with the Kurds of northern Iraq. According to Seymour Hersh, Israeli intelligence uses northern Iraq for staging subversive activities inside Iran. Hersh wrote in The New Yorker magazine three years ago that Israel also has its eyes on the fabulous oil and gas fields in the Kurdish regions of northern Iraq. Southern Kurdistan alone is estimated to hold 45 billion barrels of oil and 100 trillion cubic meters of gas.

The Israeli presence in the Kurdish areas has inevitably cast its shadows on Turkey's relations with Israel. Recently, Israel has also been unhappy over the Erdogan government's dealings with the Hamas-led Palestinian government and with Tehran. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently invited Palestinian Prime Minister and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh to visit Ankara.

Certainly, there could be more than one reason that Barzani challenged Turkey. In the interview, his attention was drawn to the Turkish opposition to the inclusion of Kirkuk in the Kurdish autonomous region. The Iraqi constitution provides for holding a referendum in Kirkuk by the end of this year on bringing that province into the Kurdistan confederacy, which at present comprises Irbil, Dohuk and Sulaymaniyah.

Barzani shot back: "We will not allow Turks to interfere in the issue of Kirkuk ... Kirkuk is an Iraqi city of Kurdish identity ... Turkey has no right to interfere in the issue of Kirkuk. If it does, we will interfere in the issue of Diyarbakr and other cities," he said in reference to cities in predominantly Kurdish-populated southeastern Turkey.

When asked whether he was threatening Ankara, Barzani said, "If we are denied our right to settle down and live freely, I swear by God that we will not allow others to live in security or stability. We are ready to defend our freedom and our cause to our end."

Specifically asked about his views on Kurdish militancy in Turkey, Barzani said, "Frankly speaking, we support their rights. We do not interfere in their affairs. They choose their way to demand their rights or to struggle for their rights ... They do not ask us and we are not ready to interfere in their affairs, but we support them morally and politically ... It is impossible to support them with weapons, but we are ready to help them with all other means."

Predictably, the reaction in Ankara has been sharp. A columnist warned that one day Barzani would come to Ankara "to lick its boots and to say that he is sorry". Erdogan, who favors a political settlement of problems in Turkey's Kurdish regions through sustained economic development and an inclusive state policy, was put on the defensive. His government is already being pilloried for being "soft" on national-security issues. With a presidential election on the horizon and parliamentary elections to follow within a few months, Erdogan warned Barzani that he'd be "crushed under his words".

The Turkish Foreign Ministry issued a note to the Iraqi government reminding the latter about the need to curb trans-border terrorism. Ankara let it be known that it might raise the northern-Iraq situation at next month's international conference on Iraq in Cairo.

Most important, Ankara made a demarche with Washington about Barzani's "extremely disturbing, unacceptable and provocative" statement. Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul spoke to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Foreign Ministry officials quoted Gul as telling Rice, "Barzani should be urged in the strongest way not to repeat his threats against Turkey."

Turkish diplomacy is doing its utmost to harmonize differences with the United States. Clearly, Turkey would like to get Washington to postpone the Kirkuk referendum so that a crisis can be averted. Turkey draws attention to its special bonds with the US. Last week Turkey accepted the responsibility of taking over the command of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces in the Kabul region for a period of eight months until December, and increased the size of its military contingent in Afghanistan from 750 troops to 1,150.

But Ankara has never really acclimatized itself to the existence of the US-backed Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) based in northern Iraq. It fears that the KRG, headed by Barzani, will incrementally serve as a pole of attraction for Turkey's Kurds; that the KRG will get emboldened to lend direct support to Kurdish terrorists operating inside Turkey; that as time passes, the KRG will garner international sympathy for the idea of wider Kurdish national self-determination.

Indeed, Turkey has gone against the US and asked Iraqi leaders directly if it can launch cross-border raids into Iraqi territory to strike Kurdish rebel groups in the area. Turkish army chief General Yasar Buyukanit said on Thursday, "An operation into Iraq is necessary," adding that the army's main rival, the Kurdistan Workers Party, "has spread its roots" and obtained "huge freedom of movement in Iraq".

Ankara visualizes the possibility that the KRG could lead to the emergence of a fully independent and sovereign Kurdish state by design or by default, and that this could threaten Turkish territorial integrity. Also, the stark reality is that US President George W Bush has no strategy for victory in Iraq. Turkey is uneasy that the US Congress might end up mandating a rapid pullout from Iraq. What happens then?

continued

God Bless

David

[mrgravyard49]

Maybe this is the start of Turkeys turn?
Seems to me turkey is the only country we are waiting on to complete Gog-Magog.
If so then we need to be looking for THE reason (The Hook) they attack Israel.

[Mr Dan]

Hi all,
Wondering what are your current AC candidates from Asia minor?

[Exit40]

PM Erdogan seems to be a noteworthy individual, with his possible assencion to the presidency, and enough resultant control of the govt' to be able to become more muslim in nature. The military is the major obstacle to that, in that they are fiercely secular and have and can stage a coup. An issue that might stop or slow that is the PKK cross border issue. The upcoming Kirkuk referendum in Iraq if passed might spur the PKK into more action cross border wise, fueled by oil money, (sorry about the pun), the purpose being to unite Turkish Kurds with Iraqi Kurds into an autnoumous region, and possible independence to form Kurdistan.

The leader of the Kurdish Regional govt', KRG, Barzani is also one to watch, and in that light the current president of Iraq, Talabani is also Kurdish. Both of these men have strong ties to Turkish individuals as well as Iranian individuals, as well as with the US. Plus the Iraqi govt' still wants control of the regions vast oil wealth. There is a round robin going on there that is difficult to keep track of.

I also think there could arise afterward an idividual who comes in peacefully, perhaps the new face of Islam, the mahdi, unknown to us at this time. Regional Kurdistan, northwest Iraq, northeast Iran, southeast Turkey, and norhteast Syria, very nearly overlies the area of the modern day Assyrians, who mostly are Christian.

http://www.answers.com/assyrian&r=67

The hook ? Israeli investment in Kurdistan, the oil fields of Kirkuk in particular. As the region continues to develop peacefully the opportunities for safe investment become greater. There is a prophecy in Zechariah I believe, I'll have to look it up, about an epaph, bathtub, or the largest measure in Hebrew commerce, flying off to Chaldea, presently in the area of Kurdistan, that is applicable here I believe. Israel is already a rich nation, but an Israel made filthy rich on Iraqi oil investment returns will not be acceptable to muslim nations. But it's not just about the money, it's about the power in the region that the money brings to Israel that will ignite the conflict.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Zec/Zec005.html

Anyway, that's just my opinion. I appreciate your input.

God Bless You

David

[Mr Dan]

Hi David, Thanks for the response. I would agree that from the breakdown of the beasts in Daniel to the lists of the seven heads in rev 13 that whats being revealed is perhaps not a revival of Rome. I believe that Josephus and Tacitus cast many a doubt to the makeup of the Romans besieging force of Jerusalem in ad 70 with mention of vast auxiliaries being called into service, primarly Syrian. Ive looked into Erdogan and not so sure about him as a candidate but will look at Barzani. Didnt the turks recently appoint a new general to oversee Nato forces recently?

Also in light of the what is viewed from the persepctive of the FP homesite what are your opinions of the possibility of the fullfillment of this being a Nato campaign based out of Asia Minor?

[Exit40]

The Iraqi Kurdish Question
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 4-24-2007 14:41:57
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A recent war of words between Turkish officials and Iraq's Kurds has revived concerns of a cross-border conflict in northern Iraq, the most peaceful part of the country. The head of Turkey's military recently threatened an invasion of the region to clear it of pro-independence Kurdish rebels who are offered sanctuary by the local government. Ankara also fears an independent Iraqi Kurdistan might further encourage separatism among Turkey's own sizeable Kurdish population. A major bone of contention remains the unsettled status of Kirkuk, an ethnically mixed city in northern Iraq whose large oil fields are coveted by many groups. An upcoming referendum, slated for late 2007, on the city's status has drawn protests from Turkish and Arab governments. Tensions have risen in Kurdistan while the U.S. military focus remains squarely on its security operations in Baghdad.

What triggered the recent flare-up in tensions?

In early April, Massoud Barzani, a top Iraqi Kurdish leader, threatened to "interfere" with the Turkey's Kurdish populations if Ankara continued "interfering" in northern Iraq, particularly in Kirkuk. His comments set off a political storm in Turkey. A U.S. State Department official called them "dangerous, provocative, and unhelpful." Judith Yaphe of the National Defense University says Barzani wants to lay down a marker with the Turks, but may have stepped over the line. "He's very cocky and thinks he has all kinds of support," she says. "But does he really think the [Kurdish militia] peshmerga can save him from a Turkish incursion?" In response to Barzani's comments, Turkey's top military chief, General Yasar Buyukanit, said the army should carry out a cross-border invasion to root out Kurdish rebels holed up in Iraqi Kurdistan. Barzani, in an April 16 meeting with new U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, seemed to retreat from his earlier outburst, but added "we will never accept being threatened."

Is a Turkish incursion into northern Iraq likely?

Experts disagree. On one hand, Turkey has made a number of small-scale and mostly unsuccessful incursions into northern Iraq over the past few decades (the most recent came in 1991 but failed to put down the Kurdish insurrection). Experts say an upturn in similar kinds of attacks--air strikes or commando raids--may be more frequent. But a full-scale invasion on the scale imagined by Buyukanit remains an unlikely scenario, says Joost Hiltermann, a regional expert with the International Crisis Group. "They would never go across the border without U.S. approval," he says. The comments made by the Turkish general, he says, owe more to internal politics in Turkey, which will hold presidential elections in May, than to military realities on the ground. "It's mostly just bluster," says Hiltermann. What is more, he adds, given the region's inaccessible terrain, no government has been able to dislodge Kurdish militants from the Qandil Mountains of northern Iraq. "It's like Tora Bora," he says. But others say an incursion by Ankara is not improbable. "Turkey is under a lot of stress," says Yaphe. "I don't think it would take much [for the situation] to flare up."

What are Turkey's main grievances with Iraqi Kurdistan?

The Turkish government has demanded that Iraqi forces arrest members of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), who use northern Iraq as a haven to carry out attacks against Turkish targets, and extradite them back to Turkey to stand trial. Turkey fears this group is resurgent and estimates as many as four thousand PKK rebels are currently in Iraq. Some experts note the timing of the latest Turkish-Kurdish tensions coincides with a presidential election in Turkey and may represent the government pandering to popular support for a crackdown against Kurdish insurgents. Others expect an increase in cross-border attacks as the snow melts in the mountains of northern Iraq. To tackle the Kurdish problem, Turkey has forged an uneasy alliance with Iran, which also holds substantial Kurdish minorities with pro-independence goals. Iran has reportedly even begun shelling Kurdish targets and abetting Islamist groups in northern Iraq.

What is the position of Iraq's Kurds?

Many of Iraq's Kurds sympathize with the aims, if not the methods, of the PKK, which pushes for greater Kurdish autonomy. But the leadership in Iraqi Kurdistan is nervous about upsetting the generally-stable status quo by offering full support to the PKK. Steven Cook of the Council on Foreign Relations says in this CFR.org interview that a Kurdish-led clampdown against the PKK could provoke a new round of violence in the north between the various Iraqi Kurdish political factions and PKK. Still, a bigger issue for Iraq's Kurds is not the presence of PKK forces on their soil but the unsettled status of Kirkuk.

Why does Turkey oppose Kurdish annexation of Kirkuk?

Turkey considers Kirkuk a historically Turkmen city, though some experts debate the merits of this argument. "They talk of this as a deep emotional issue, that the Turkmen are our brothers, but part of this is an invention," says Yaphe. "Since when did they care about the poor Turkmen?" Turkmen and Turks are ethnically and linguistically related, but most experts say a bigger fear for Turkey is the oil wealth that would flow into the hands of Iraqi Kurds. Turkey fears it would provide a steady flow of revenue from Iraqi Kurds to fund the separatist struggle of some Turkey's thirty million ethnic Kurds. In Ankara's view, Kirkuk provides the final piece for an independent Iraqi Kurdistan, which could whip up Kurdish nationalism in Turkey. Hence, Ankara has vociferously protested the upcoming referendum, as mandated by the Iraqi constitution, to determine Kirkuk's fate.

How have the Kurds sought to claim Kirkuk?

Although the Kurds have been in de facto control of Kirkuk since 2003, they want the city to be incorporated officially into their self-governing region. They won a major victory in March when Baghdad endorsed a relocation plan for Arabs, mostly poorer Shiites, who were forcibly moved to Kirkuk as part of Saddam Hussein's "Arabization" campaign. This measure was mandated by Article 140 of Iraq's constitution. It is a voluntary program with participants reportedly receiving about $15,000 and a plot of land, but Yaphe says a campaign of intimidation--or what she calls ethnic cleansing, at the hands of the Kurds--has preceded these relocation efforts. "You can be shot or you can go," she says. An estimated 350,000 Kurds have transplanted themselves to Kirkuk since April 2003, while roughly 150,000 Arabs have fled because of intimidation or violence. "They've complained about being Arabized," says Yaphe. "Well, now they're Kurdifying the area." Hiltermann says many of the city's Arab residents were not forced out but fled voluntarily. "Most people don't want to be there," he says. "It's not safe. There are no jobs, no infrastructure."

Why does Kirkuk hold so much importance to Iraqis?

The city remains home to large Turkmen, Arab (both Shiite and Sunni), Kurdish, and Christian populations, each citing ties dating back centuries. "The Kurds see Kirkuk as their Jerusalem but the Turkmen see it as the same way," Yaphe says. But underneath the surface, the city's large oil reserves may be driving these groups to claim control the city. Located 180 miles north of Baghdad, Kirkuk and its surrounding area hold roughly 8 percent of the country's estimated 78 billion barrels of oil reserves. The Kurds have already have already signed production sharing agreements with foreign oil companies to develop oil fields in the region. The deals come amid heavy debate in Baghdad over a nationwide law to distribute oil revenues. The highly contentious law focuses on clarifying vague language in the Iraqi constitution over how oil revenues from future oil fields should distributed and whether existing contracts already made by the Kurdish authorities would be recognized. The Kurds may partly compromise on the hydrocarbon law "from a desire among Kurds to have companies operate in their territory with the confidence that a national law would impart," writes Soner Cagaptay of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

The city has also witnessed a string of recent suicide attacks, mostly at the hands of al-Qaeda-affiliated insurgents. Peter Galbraith, a former U.S. diplomat, calls Kirkuk a "ticking ethnic time bomb." Experts expect an escalation of violence there ahead of the referendum. Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army has a presence in the city and has reportedly staged attacks against PUK and KDP government institutions.

What is the likelihood of the referendum on Kirkuk taking place?

There is considerable resistance from Sunni Arabs and Turkmen to the referendum taking place as scheduled. The bipartisan U.S. Iraq Study Group recommended it be delayed until a more favorable political climate emerges. Kurdish officials in Baghdad have repeatedly threatened to pull out of the government if their demands on holding the referendum are not met, and the Shiites in power have a tacit alliance with the Kurds. But the terms of the referendum have yet to be determined, including Kurdish demands to push out the borders of Kirkuk's province to include four largely Kurdish towns. The Kurds have met stiff resistance from Sunni Arab politicians as well as from Sadr's Shiite faction, which fears a Kurdish-controlled Kirkuk would spur Iraq to break up along ethnic lines. Hiltermann, in a new ICG report, calls the referendum process "a train wreck" and presses the U.S. government to create a new process to reach a final status on Kirkuk that is acceptable to the Kurds and other ethnic and political parties in Iraq.

What role has the United States played?

The United States is in a bind, experts say. On one hand, as Hiltermann points out, the Kurds have been the most reliable U.S. ally among Iraq's warring ethnic and political factions (though tensions heightened in January after U.S. Special Forces nabbed five Iranian operatives in Irbil without notifying Kurdish authorities first). On the other hand, Washington does not wish to upset its already-fractured relations with Ankara, a traditional U.S. ally in the region. The United States classifies the PKK as a terrorist organization but has neither pressured the regional Iraqi Kurdish government to rein in the PKK rebels nor deployed troops to northern Iraq. "It's a question of not wanting to upset the apple cart in northern Iraq," says CFR's Cook. "[The Turks] want the United States either to engage the PKK militarily directly, or to give Turkey useful intelligence so the Turks can go after the PKK themselves." Washington has repeatedly told the Turks not to intervene in Iraqi affairs and appointed a retired Air Force general, Joseph Ralston, as a special envoy to defuse the crisis in Kurdistan. According to the Washington Post's David Ignatius, Ralston warned the White House last December that Turkey might invade by the end of April or seize an eight-mile border strip in northern Iraq unless there is a heavier U.S. intervention. Experts say Washington is preoccupied with security operations in Anbar Province and Baghdad. That could change with a flare-up of violence--or ratcheting up of political rhetoric--along the Iraqi-Turkish border.

By Lionel Beehner
www.cfr.org

http://www.aina.org/news/2007042494157.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

Didnt the turks recently appoint a new general to oversee Nato forces recently?

Also in light of the what is viewed from the persepctive of the FP homesite what are your opinions of the possibility of the fullfillment of this being a Nato campaign based out of Asia Minor?

Hi Mr Dan. I believe the Turkish general was promoted to head NATO forces in Afganistan, if memory serves.

Your second question falls into a category I will call 'Is Gog/Magog Armageddon?'. I'm uncertain at this time. I tend to think they are different campaigns despite many similarities. For one thing, one sixth of Gog/Magog forces are spared, while at Armageddon the entire force is wiped out at Christ's return. Also, Israel after Gog/Magog turns to their God, but possibly not to Christ whom they will mourn as a lost Son at His return. I believe Gog/Magog is Islamic, and Armageddon is international, allowing for a NATO/ UN force to gather in Israel. Since the WEU is comprised of NATO nations it obviously will be included. I respect Herb's work and while I cannot fully agree he is right, I also cannot discount his findings. He may be wrong, but he may be right, at least he is onto something that should be closely watched.

Still, I am unsure of the timeline. Perhaps someone should start a thread on this subject. I remember Seeker did an excellent study on this somewhere espousing that the two battles are one in the same. Lots of complimentary Scriptures were used, and only a few details were left undetermined. What are your thoughts on this ?

God Bless You

David

[Mr Dan]

Im still in the uncertain category myself as far as Gog/Magog is concerned. About the time Seeker was breaking it all down I was doing the same but got sidetracked and need to get back to work on it. I have a suspicion but need to look at it more. Personally from my interpretation of Dan 11 I have a feeling were looking at a series of battles over a period of a time that lead up the the AC rising to prominence and culminating in the last battle but Im just not sure. Regardless I would agree I think were looking at significant events with a vast number of players and I cant shake the feeling that the shoes about to drop in a big way. Ultimately however I just dont know and was wondering what your thinking since youve been watching Turkey so closely.

[Exit40]

Hi MR Dan. Bchandler had a post back in Nov that broke down the series of interlinked battles. Here it is............

bchandler

Note: some of these prophecies have elements that are already fulfilled, but also appear to have elements that have yet to be fulfilled. With that said... Here are...

The thirteen end times battles in scripture:

1. The first battle appears in - Zephania 2:1-7 and discusses the destruction of the Gaza/Philistine area.

2. This in turn appears to trigger a response from Egypt and we see the destruction and desolation of Egypt for 40 years in - Ezekiel 29, Isaiah 19 and Isaiah 27:12-13

3. Next we see the battle of several north african nations - Ezekiel 30

4.followed by the battle of Lebanon - Ezekiel 31, Zechariah 11:1, Ezekiel 26:27-29, Ezekiel 32:30

5. Next we see the battle of the west bank areas Samaria, Ephraim and Manasseh - Isaiah 17

6. The battle for Syria and destruction of Damascus - Isaiah 17

7. Russia, Persia(Iran), and Ethiopia fight next Ezekiel 38, 39, Ezekiel 32:24-26

8. followed by Iraq(Babylon) - Isaiah 13 Jeremiah 50&51, Revelation 16, 17, 18, Ezekiel32:22

9. Jordan (Gilead, Ammon, Moab, Edom) Isaiah 34&63, Obadiah, Ezekiel 32:29

10. The battle in the valley of Jehosaphat - Joel 3

11. The battle for Jerusalem - Zecharia 12, 13, 14

12. The battle with the kings of the east - Revelation 16:12

13. The battle of Armagedon Revelation 16:16

Special note on Ezekiel 32: Causes terror in the land of the living... possible link or response to terrorism?

According to Dr. Crowder these scriptures point to 13 distinct and separate tribulation era battles that will be fought and their prophetic elements fulfilled, just as their historic elements are already fulfilled.

These battles appear in scripture to be seperate battles in an over all war.. and some of them may coincide... but it seems that the major event tying them all together is the detruction of Gaza and Egypt. These two events seem drag all the other parties into the conflict.

Looking at the descriptions of the destruction visited on these nations... much of it is by fire(nuclear? from heaven?)

In some cases the timing for the battle is given as when Egypt is desolated.

Have fun studying this... as I am just starting to study it myself.

http://fulfilledprophecy.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=17066

Back to Turkey, I became interested in this expressly because of some research I did into the Kurdish issue. Also, the Kurdish people occupy an area very similar to the modern day Assyrian peoples, who have a large diaspora in the West. The AC is called the Assyrian, plain and simple reading of Scripture, but could arise from the diaspora in the EU, or US, or even from Istanbul. Then there is this..............

ISLAMABAD - Turkish Daily News

Monday, February 26, 2007

The plan pledges the recognition of Israel in exchange of the latter's working with the new Hamas-Fatah government that is expected to be formed in Palestine

The foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Jordan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt and Turkey have agreed upon a leaders' summit as soon as possible, to focus on a Middle East and Arab peace plan.

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/arti ... wsid=67006

Here are seven heads, so where are the ten horns, kings, who have no kingdom ? I have read reports the seven nations are not now the ones originally listed in that article, and the Saud initiative has been on the board, sort of, for a few years now, just lately regaining momentum. I wonder if this has any true meaning, or is just another distraction.

So much to think about. I feel that the next eruptions in the ME are going to be a Turkey/Iran/kurdish Iraq/PKK issue, and a battle with Syria over the Golan Heigths which will include Hezballah and Hamas in Lebanon/Palestine. Isaiah 17 maybe ? Let's see how desparate Syria will become. If they attack Israel with WMD then............ I'm not sure of the implications of the Kurdish issue, which may very well be solved diplomatically.

God Bless You

David

[Mr Dan]

Interesting, thanks for the info.

[njfishwatchTurkey&Isr]

Seeing the article Herb posted about the letter being sent out by the Sanhedrin regarding a conference in regards to rebuilding the temple along with the issues in Turkey are getting very interesting. The fact that the conference is to be held in the fall--feast of tabernacles---which is when I believe the 70th week will begin and the fact that Turkey is looking to become "more Islamic" is shaping up to be interesting.

Will Turkey become an Islamist state?
By LINDA MICHAUD-EMIN
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar


Talkbacks for this article: 72

Turkey, the world's prime example of a mainly Muslim country as a secular democratic state, may be losing that status. For the first time, a member of an Islamic party stands poised to win the presidency. And the upcoming parliamentary elections are likely to result in yet another victory for the Islamic-oriented government.

The ruling Justice and Development Party, led by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has selected the party's No. 2 leader, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, as its candidate for the presidency. Secularists fear this may be the beginning of the end for the secular nature of the republic, as established by president Mustafa Kemal Ataturk more than 80 years ago.

While Turkey has twice had a prime minister from an Islamic party, the president is looked on as a bulwark of the secular system. The president plays an important role in Turkey. He appoints the prime minister, the military's chief of staff, university rectors, and members of the country's highest court.

The other institution safeguarding the status quo is the Turkish army, which has brought down governments on several occasions.

True, Gul has promised to maintain the state's values of secularism and democracy, as well as to keep up Turkey's good relations with the United States and Israel, and its pursuit of membership in the European Union. But some of his past actions worry secularists, including Gul's meeting with Hamas leader Khalad Mashaal at the Justice and Development Party headquarters in Ankara in 2006. And Erdogan advocated a law to make adultery a crime, in 2004.

As a result, many secularists, including the chief of staff, Gen. Yasar Buyukanit, argue that Gul and Erdogan are merely paying lip service to secularism. They vividly recall Erdogan saying before he was premier, "Thank God, I am a servant of the Shari'a," or Islamic law, and, "We will turn all our schools" into Islamic ones.

The growth of the Justice and Development Party's political power is a result in part of social and economic changes. To encourage modernization and development, Ataturk made Turkey a highly centralized state. As a result, the ruling center often discriminated against the country's Anatolian periphery, including small and medium business owners, many of whom are pious Muslims.
During the 1980s, economic reform focusing on free trade and privatization has benefited this group, many of whom support the current regime.

Large-scale immigration from these peripheral
villages into the big cities has also boosted support for JDP and its more extremist predecessor, the Welfare Party.

Additional factors helped bring an Islamic party to power: a big recession; corruption, incompetence and divisions among secular party leaders; and a new generation of Islamic politicians who know how to portray themselves as modern as well as honest.

The effort to elect Gul raises the specter that either the Constitutional Court, another fortress of secularism, or the military might force the government out and call new elections. Yet such elections would be unlikely to change much, as the half-dozen secular parties on the left and the center-right simply cannot work together or find charismatic leaders to counter those presently ruling the country. Moreover, if such intervention originated from the army, it could sound the death knell for Turkey's attempt to join the EU, which could only hurt the army's standing with the public.

Whatever happens in the near-term, the Turkey that the world has known for 83 years -and considered a success - is passing through the most perilous times it has known for many generations.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? ... 2FShowFull

[Exit40]

Hi NJ. Good to hear from you. Here is another article about Turkeys upcoming turmoil. What I find particularly interesting is what the Turks call the 'deep state'. It's been called that for some time, but not much is really known about it generally. What do you think ?

God Bless You

David

Turkey's Identity Crisis
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 5-3-2007 14:58:25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TURKEY this spring is experiencing a perilous identity crisis.

Along one axis, devotees of the strict secularism at the core of the Turkish republic established in 1923 by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk have been resisting any hint of change from the governing Justice and Development Party, whose roots are Islamist. At its core, this is an issue of the place of religion in public life. When 700,000 demonstrators -- a majority of them women -- demonstrated Sunday in Istanbul against parliamentary efforts to elect the party's foreign minister Abdullah Gul as Turkey's next president, they expressed anxieties about any encroachment of religious symbols and practices on their secular way of life.

Along the other axis is a conflict over political power, pitting Prime Minister Recip Tayyip Erdogan against Turkey's military, which has been threatening to remove the elected government of the Justice and Development Party, known as AK, if it insists on pushing for the election of a president the army regards either as too Islamist or insufficiently secular.

It is often said that the generals, who see themselves as the guardians of the Kemalist Republic, are simply over-sensitive to the fact that Gul's wife wears the Muslim headscarf in public and don't want Turkey's first lady to become emblematic of a regression away from secularism. There are deeper reasons, however, for the military to issue its barely veiled warning of what would be its fifth toppling of a government since 1960.

Many of the Turkish civilians who marched Sunday in Istanbul may have had in mind the Justice and Development Party's efforts to outlaw adultery and allow students from Islamic schools to enroll in universities, but the generals are more concerned with preserving their control over what Turks call the "deep state" -- the undemocratic levers of power that remain in the hands of the chiefs of the army and the security services.

Although the role of president is meant to be largely symbolic, a President Gul would be chief of the armed forces. He would have the power to appoint the chief of the general staff. He would preside over any meeting called to purge an officer suspected of being too religious in his private life. These powers in the hands of a politician from a political party with an Islamist background would threaten the generals' hold on the deep state.

But the generals are not the only ones striking a paranoid pose. When Turkey's Constitutional Court ruled Tuesday that because Parliament lacked a quorum it could not elect Gul president, Erdogan called the verdict "a bullet fired at democracy." With the European Union weighing both Turkey's democratic and secularist credentials for membership, Turkish politicians and military must sort out their identity crisis peacefully, and in accordance with democratic rules.

New York Times

http://www.aina.org/news/2007050395825.htm

[njfishwatchTurkey&Isr]

Hey David,

This group had been armed and trained by the Turkish “deep state” – the code word in Turkey for the security establishment – to fight the Kurdish insurgency during the 1980s and the 1990s.

http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=3176

What is so fascinating is that it looks like Turkey could be making a way back to Islam which I believe must occur before the midpoint of the 70th week and likely before the 70th week. The article you posted mentioned that the President appoints the chief of the general staff. Erdogan has the majority support so the only thing going to stop Gul from winning the Presidency is the army. Everything in Turkey will shift...the army will then exist to spread Islam rather than exist to protect secularism. It will be interesting to see what happens.

[Exit40]

Erdogan has the majority support so the only thing going to stop Gul from winning the Presidency is the army. Everything in Turkey will shift...the army will then exist to spread Islam rather than exist to protect secularism. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Sure. And if the general population rises against the appointment of Gul the Army will be brought in to restore and maintain order. Methinks the 'deep state' won't be too deep after that.

God Bless You

David

[Exit40]

Iraqi Kurdish Leader Tells Turkey Dialogue Should Replace Threats
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 5-8-2007 21:19:27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(BRUSSELS) -- Iraqi Kurd leader Massud Barzani on Monday denied that he threatened to intervene in Turkey over the Kurdish minority question, while warning Ankara he would not tolerate any threats from them.

Barzani, questioned in Brussels by Euro MPs, said threats are no longer a "valid" approach.

"Do we feel threatened by Turkey? The language of threat is no longer valid today, dialogue is more constructive. We are not threatening anybody but we will not accept threats from anybody either," he said.

Last month Turkey's army chief called for a military incursion into neighbouring northern Iraq to hunt down Turkish Kurd rebels based there, despite US objections.

Army chief Yasar Buyukanit became the first such high-ranking military official to publicly argue for a cross-border operation to crack down on bases of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) in northern Iraq.

Turkey charges that several thousand PKK rebels have found refuge in northern Iraq in their 22-year struggle for self-rule in southeastern Turkey.

The Turkish media has quoted Barzani, head of the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq, as saying that they would meddle in Turkey's already restive, predominantly-Kurdish southeast if Ankara continued to oppose Iraqi Kurdish ambitions to attach Kirkuk to their region.

Barzani reportedly said that if Turkey "interferes in Kirkuk over just a few thousand Turkmens, then we will take action regarding the 30 million Kurds in Turkey."

In Brussels the Kurdish leader urged Ankara to seek a political solution to the Kurdish question, adding that Turkey often used the PKK as a "pretext" for its actions.

Turkey is upset by Barzani's plan to hold a referendum in the oil-rich northern Iraq city of Kirkuk.

Kirkuk, which Iraqi Kurds want to make part of their autonomous region, has a large population of Sunni and Shiite Arabs, as well as Turkmen, making for a fragile ethnic mix.

Turkey sees itself as the traditional protector of the Turkmen people who, together with the Arabs, complain of being bullied by the Kurds who make up half the population of the city and control the security services.

Barzani stressed, in his discussions in the European parliament, his refusal to postpone the referendum which he said would be carried out before the end of the year.

"Any intervention from outside would add to the complexities and create more problems in the future," he added.

However he stressed his support for "a democratic, federal and multi-party system in Iraq".

"At the same time there has to be segregation of religion from state," he told the assembled MEPs.

An International Crisis Group report last month said that a new approach is urgently needed to settle the status of Kirkuk.

"A referendum conducted against the wishes of the other communities in 2007 could cause the civil war to spread to the Kurdish region, until now Iraq's only quiet area."

http://www.aina.org/news/20070508161927.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

50,000 Turkish Soldiers At Turkish-Iraqi Border Region
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 5-15-2007 14:51:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50,000 Turkish soldiers now concentrated at Turk-Iraqi border region of Sirnak. According to military sources a large operation by Turkish military forces aimed at PKK (Worker's Party of Kurdistan) terrorists in the provinces of Sirnak near the Iraqi border continues. Units of the Turkish military are fighting in the Cudi and Gabar mountains, as well as the Bestler-Dereler points near Sirnak. New position have been staked out by Turkish armed forces near the border, taking the border into direct target in preparation for terrorists trying to cross over. While the transfer of soldiers and vehicles to the border area continues, as it has for 3 months now.

U.S. Ambassador to Ankara Ross Wilson stated the United States supports the Turkish military operation in its pursuit of PKK terrorists. "Turkey has been in a leader position for a long time in the fight against terror. It has faced terror on a high level for a long time. Turkey has lost 40 thousand lives fighting in the last years," Wilson stated speaking at an anti-terrorism conference held this week at the Swissotel in Istanbul.

Speaking in direct reference to the renewed efforts by Turkish security forces against PKK forces last week, Wilson said, "In recent weeks, the Turkish security forces began an open struggle against the PKK. The U.S. supports this struggle," Ross Wilson underlined, Hurriyet reports.

www.PanARMENIAN.Net

http://www.aina.org/news/2007051595146.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

Two Secularist Parties Form Election Alliance in Turkey
By VOA News
17 May 2007

Turkey's PM R. Tayyip Erdogan (L) and Deniz Baykal, leader of CHP at Tesvikiye mosque in Istanbul (File)
Turkey's main opposition party and a left-wing party have formed an alliance to contest July parliamentary elections.

The Republican People's Party and the smaller Democratic Left Party say they will cooperate to challenge the ruling Islamist-rooted A.K. party of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The alliance between the two secularist parties would allow the Democratic Left Party to circumvent a rule requiring parties to win at least 10 percent of the vote before entering parliament.

In another development, a top Turkish prosecutor has ordered the main Kurdish political party, Democratic Society Party, to expel four members who were convicted of links to separatist Kurdish rebels. The four include prominent Kurdish politician and former member of parliament Leyla Zana.

The Kurdish party has said it will field candidates as independents to bypass the 10 percent rule.

Mr. Erdogan called the early elections after parliament failed to elect his party's nominee for president, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul.

More than one million people took to the streets of Turkey's third-largest city, Izmir, on Sunday to protest Mr. Erdogan's government.

Mr. Erdogan said Wednesday that he supports the country's secular laws. He says his government has done nothing to alter Turkey's secular system during his four-and-a-half years in power.

Some information for this report was provided by AFP, AP and Reuters.

http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-05-17-voa48.cfm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

Turkey At the Boiling Point
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 5-22-2007 15:25:29
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISTANBUL -- Two simmering problems threaten to boil over in Turkey this summer with greater international consequences than ever before.

First is the relationship between the Islamic religion and the state that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk founded in 1923 and whose secular nature the army has protected ever since. Second is the raids against Turkish troops by terrorists from Turkey's minority Kurdish population who are now camped across the border in Iraq.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan ignited the current political controversy by signaling his desire to succeed the retiring secularist, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, in the presidency. Faced with stiff resistance to his candidacy, Erdogan tried to deliver the post to his close associate, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, himself a devout Islamic believer.

That prospect aroused fears that the loss of checks and balances could lead to an Islamization of the state, if not by the current Justice and Development Party (AKP) leadership then by more fervent successors. The army, responsible for four coups in the last five decades, warned against the selection.

Erdogan then reprimanded the army, moved up parliamentary elections from the fall to July 22 and proposed a referendum to switch the election of a president to a direct popular vote.

The most dramatic reaction to Erdogan's divisive thrust has been the peaceful but massive street demonstrations, several of them numbering more than 1 million participants.

Erdogan's record of the past four years in office has been markedly moderate - with a few exceptions, such as his short-lived effort to make adultery a crime. He enacted fiscal and structural reforms that spurred economic growth. And he passed civil rights and penal legislation to strengthen Turkey's application for membership in the European Union. In short, Erdogan and the AKP produced the most efficient and effective Turkish government in decades.

So how to explain the fears that generated a military warning and the public protests of unexpected size and diversity?

Part of the reaction can be attributed to the radical secularism of Turkey's traditional social and economic elite. Despite Erdogan's record of moderation, some of the radical secularists claim the AKP has a "secret agenda" to impose harsh Islamic constraints on Turkish life once it has amassed monopoly power. But their reaction hardly accounts for the outpouring of protest from a broad segment of the society.

More significantly, women played a key role in the demonstrations. As the most liberated women in the Islamic world, active in business, culture and politics, Turkish women have a lot to lose. When they contemplate greater Islamic influence on their public lives, the specter on their minds is neighboring Iran, once cosmopolitan and now theocratic.

Concerning the revival of Kurdish terrorism, the army is privately warning that it will close down the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) camps in neighboring Iraq if no one else does.

It faults the Kurdish regional government in Iraq, and the United States occupying forces, for not suppressing the cross-border raids. By year's end, a scheduled referendum may deliver control of Iraq's oil-rich city of Kirkuk to the autonomous regional government. That could trigger action by the Turkish Army, which fears the impact on Turkey's Kurds of a strong and essentially independent Kurdish entity next door.

Turkey's geopolitical importance has grown as it has become stronger and more stable while its surrounding region has regressed. It is a critical bridge between Europe and Asia, a model for harmonizing Islam and democracy, and a key factor in Iraq's future. Yet at this critical juncture, the United States and Europe find their leverage on Turkey markedly diminished. Anger at America and Europe is rampant because of the U.S. occupation of Iraq and Europe's vocal reluctance to grant Turkey EU membership.

The Bush administration has rightly voiced support for a political, not military, solution to Turkey's impasse. The United States must press for tougher measures against cross-border raids by the PKK that, since the beginning of last year, have accounted for the deaths of 600 people, including many troops.

On both counts, time is short and the summer months may be critical to forestalling what are now clearly looming catastrophes.

By James F. Hoge Jr.

http://www.aina.org/news/20070522102529.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

Turkey's Leader Backs Attack on Kurds
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 5-24-2007 15:28:28
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANKARA, Turkey (AP) -- Turkey's prime minister said he would back the country's generals if they decide to retaliate for a suicide bombing in the capital by striking Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan urged the United States to crack down on Kurdish separatists operating from across the border, all but accusing the rebels of carrying out Tuesday's attack.

"If the terrorist organization is based in northern Iraq, then the United States must fulfill its responsibility," Erdogan said, referring to the Kurdistan Workers Party, the rebel group known as the PKK.

While the United States also views the PKK as a terrorist organization, it opposes a crackdown on Kurdish militants in Iraq, fearing that would complicate efforts to restore stability in Iraq. The rebels are fighting for autonomy in the Kurdish-dominated southeast, which borders northern Iraq.

The PKK denied responsibility for the blast, which killed six people and wounded the dozens at a busy shopping mall.

"We openly declare that we have no involvement and do not approve of this kind of act," PKK commanders said in a statement Thursday.

They accused the Turkish military of trying to win support from the United States and Iraqi Kurds for "a cross-border operation that the military has wanted to carry out for a long time."

The PKK has denied involvement in similar attacks in the past. In some cases, militants suspected of ties to the rebel group later claimed responsibility.

Private NTV television, quoting police officials, said the bomb was made of plastic explosives. The military says the PKK is smuggling hundreds of pounds of plastic explosives into the country from Iraq.

Gen. Yasar Buyukanit, chief of the military, stressed the need for a cross-border operation in April but it was not clear whether the military has sought government approval.

Erdogan said his government would support them if they do. "When necessary, this step would be taken, there would be no delay," the prime minister told private ATV television late Wednesday.

"It is out of the question for us to fall into a disagreement with our security forces, soldiers, on this issue," he said in response to question about where he stands on the subject.

Such action could burden the U.S. military with trying to resolve a conflict between two crucial partners, the Turks and the Iraqi Kurds. Washington has urged Turkish restraint.

Earlier Wednesday, Ankara Gov. Kemal Onal said the bomber had been identified as Guven Akkus, a 28-year-old from the Kurdish southeast who had spent time in prison for hanging illegal posters and resisting police. He did not say what kind of posters they were.

A land mine believed to have been planted by Kurdish rebels killed five Turkish soldiers Thursday in southeastern Turkey where large-scale military operations are ongoing against separatists.

Turkey staged several incursions into Iraq in the early 1990s with as many as 50,000 troops. But each time, the rebels made a comeback after most of the Turkish soldiers withdrew.

The Turkish military says up to 3,800 rebels are based just across the border in Iraq and that up to 2,300 operate inside Turkey. The conflict has killed tens of thousands since the rebels took up arms in 1984.

By Suzan Fraser

http://www.aina.org/news/20070524102828.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

Turkey Shells North Iraq Area to Quell Kurdish Rebels
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 6-4-2007 14:24:22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANKARA, Turkey (AP) -- Turkish troops shelled a border area in northern Iraq early Sunday in an attack on Kurdish rebels based there, an Iraqi Kurdish leader said.

The leader of the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq, Massoud Barzani, said there was shelling by Turkish troops on Kurdish areas but no incursion.

"We reject any interference in Iraqi affairs, and we do not accept any presence of Turkish forces on Iraqi lands. There was shelling by the Turkish troops on Kurdish areas. The Turkish army did not enter Iraqi territory yet but if they did, we would consult the Iraqi government and deal with it as an Iraqi issue," Barzani said at a news conference after meeting with fellow Kurdish leader and Iraqi President Jalal Talabani.

Turkish authorities were not immediately available to comment.

Turkey has been building up its military forces on the Iraqi border in recent weeks, amid debate among political and military leaders about whether to attack separatist rebels of the PKK, or Kurdistan Workers' Party. The rebels stage raids in Turkey after crossing over from Iraq.

http://www.aina.org/news/2007060492422.htm

God Bless

David

[Mr Dan]

Interesting articles. I wonder what news will be seeing in the weeks following this meeting coming up in Turkey.

[Seeker]

Exit40

“Still, I am unsure of the timeline. Perhaps someone should start a thread on this subject. I remember Seeker did an excellent study on this somewhere espousing that the two battles are one in the same. Lots of complimentary Scriptures were used, and only a few details were left undetermined. What are your thoughts on this ?”

Mr. Dan

“Im still in the uncertain category myself as far as Gog/Magog is concerned. About the time Seeker was breaking it all down I was doing the same but got sidetracked and need to get back to work on it.”

Here’s one discussion on the topic. I found it with the search tool here. Keyword “gog”, author “seeker”. There is a bunch more as I have had this discussion on numerous occasions. You should find plenty to think about if you look through some of those search results.

http://fulfilledprophecy.com/bb/viewtop ... hlight=gog

Peace,
Seeker

[Seeker]

With all the recent activity in Turkey and a request to post a copy of a summary I wrote back in 2005, I thought it would be a good time to post the evidence for Turkey producing the AC. This is somewhat old but still valid. I have much more I could add now but never seem to be able to update it...lol.

Peace,
Seeker
___________________________________________________________

Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:20 pm Post subject: Re: The Case for the AC Rising from Turkey

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll try to provide a basic overview of the scripture and research that backs the theory of Turkey being the nation the AC arises from. This will be a summary of information contained in a number of threads that helped develop the Turkey theory. Many aspects related to the theory have already been discussed in those threads.

Satan's Seat

The most direct link of Turkey to scripture is contained in Rev 2. Pergamos was one of the seven churches addressed in the first part of the book of Revelation. Those 7 churches were all located in Turkey at the time when John wrote the words in Revelation, given to him by our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus. The isle of Patmos where John was exiled to was just off the western coast of Turkey. These were physical churches full of believers living in what we know as modern day Turkey.

Revelation 1

11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

I will spend a little time on a few of the other churches before getting back to Pergamos. This will help us understand the conditions in the area that the earliest churches lived in. The church at Ephesus was praised for hating the deeds of the Nicolaitanes. These deeds would be considered against Jesus thus for Satan.

Ephesus

6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate.

"The church at Ephesus (Rev. 2:6) is commended for hating the "deeds" of the Nicolaitanes, and the church of Pergamos is blamed for having them who hold their "doctrines" (15). They were seemingly a class of professing Christians, who sought to introduce into the church a false freedom or licentiousness, thus abusing Paul's doctrine of grace (compare 2 Pet. 2:15, 16, 19), and were probably identical with those who held the doctrine of Baalam (q.v.), Rev. 2:14."

http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/nicolaitanes.html

Jesus tells us through John that there existed in Smyrna a group of Jews that He described as "the synagogue of Satan". This indicates that the powers of Satan were live and active in the Smyrna (Turkey) region.

Smyrna

9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Thyatira was rebuked for fornication and eating things sacrificed unto idols. So we have more things we know are Satanic inspired. They are praised for "not" knowing the depths of Satan. The Satanic influence is again shown to be prevalent in that small western edge of Turkey where these 7 churches were located.

Thyatira

20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

24 But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden.
25 But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.

In Philadelphia the synagogue of Satan is mentioned again.

Philadelphia

9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Pergamos is the city that has a direct reference to Satan dwelling there. John tells us directly that Pergamos is where the seat of Satan is and where Satan dwells. The Babylonian priests preserved the Babylonian religion after the fall of Babylon. First in the Persia-Media empire of Daniel 8 and then it was passed on to the Greek empire. After the breakup of the Greek empire, following Alexander’s death, the Babylonian priests fled the Romans to Pergamos to preserve the religion. From Pergamos it infiltrated into the early harlot Christian churches, the Jews labeled as the synagogue of Satan, and influenced Islam. In a sense Turkey could be related to the "mother of harlots and abominations". The abominations as described in the churches above inspired by the heavy Satanic influence in the area that the churches were located. The Babylonian religion had already infiltrated the churches even in the beginning.

Rev 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

Rev 2:13 I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.

There is no doubt that John has labeled Pergamos as where Satan's seat is and where Satan dwells in Rev 2:13. Flip chapter and verse to Rev 13:2 and we have this scripture concerning the AC. Here we are told that the AC is given 3 things from the dragon (Satan). He is given his power, seat, and great authority. Satan's seat is said to be in Pergamos.

Rev 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

Four out of the 7 churches had Satanic influences. There seems to be a power base located in the general area of the 7 churches with Satan's base being in Pergamos. Pergamos is now called Bergama, Turkey. Rev 2:13 is the only scripture that I know of in bible that gives us any clue to an earthly location for Satan. So at least in John's time Satan had a seat in Turkey. The Altar of Zeus was also located in Pergamos. A statue of Zeus was placed in the temple by Antiochus Epiphanies prior to its destruction and would be considered an abomination standing in the temple.

Revelation 17 gives us a view of what the AC's empire will look like just prior to its destruction. We have a picture of a beast with 7 heads and 10 horns with a woman sitting on it. Rev 17:7 an angel tells John he will tell him the mystery of the woman and the beast with 7 heads/10 horns. So here we are given an interpretation of what these things represent.

7 And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.
8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

Revelation 12:3 tells us the red dragon has 7 heads and 10 horns. Rev 12:9 defines the dragon as Satan. The beast in Rev 17 has 7 heads/10 horns and comes out of the bottomless pit. I believe that we can confidently say that the beast with 7 heads/ 10 horns of Rev 17 is referring to Satan.

Revelation 12

3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.

9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Using these 3 verses we can tie Pergamos, the AC, and Satan together (Rev 2:13, Rev 13:2, and Rev 12:3). We know the beast of Rev 17 represents Satan and his last world empire. The angel has told John he will reveal the mystery. The angel continues the description in Rev 17:9.

City on 7 Hills

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

This angel, sent from God, tells us that the 7 heads are 7 mountains the woman sits on. Rev 17:18 defines the woman as that great city.

18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

Strong's concordance provides "hills" as one definition for mountains. So the woman (city) riding on the beast (Satan) sits on 7 mountains (hills). Many claim that Rome is the city referred to as sitting on 7 hills. Rome wasn't actually founded on 7 hills though. There was a city that was built on 7 hills, it was Constantinople also known as New Rome and modern day as Istanbul, Turkey.

Istanbul is located on the western coast of Turkey close to where the 7 churches were. We know Satan's seat was in nearby Pergamos. Currently Istanbul is the Keeper of the Keys of Mecca and also where leader of the Eastern Orthodox Church is based. The Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox have been taking steps to reunite. Istanbul could possibly evolve into an international city representing all major religions. Lately they have been building new worship centers that have Christian, Jewish, and Islamic services in the same building.

Revelation 18 talks about the great city being destroyed. The city is a trade center. Istanbul is a long established important trade port. It is literally where the West, Middle East, and East meet. The nation of Turkey sits on 4 separate bodies of water. Revelation 17 speaks of the whore that sits on many waters. The whore is the woman which is the city on 7 hills which is the city of Istanbul. The city is in the region of Satan's seat and dwelling place.

The 4 World Empires

If Turkey is to be considered as the nation where the AC rises from then it also has to match other pertinent scripture. The book of Daniel, without a doubt, gives us the most information about the 4th and final beast kingdom. Daniel 2, 7, & 8 all three talk about the 4 world kingdoms that will exist on earth.

All 3 chapters follow the same format. First there is a dream or vision. Next Daniel asks for the meaning of the dream/vision and then an interpretation is given to Daniel from God. It is important to note that God has given us the meaning of the particular dream or vision in all 3 chapters. I know I can't improve upon the interpretation given by God so accept it as the truth and precise meaning of the vision.

Dan 2:19 Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven.

Dan 2:28 But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these;

Dan 2:36 This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.

39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.
40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.

Daniel is told that there will be only 4 kingdoms that rule over the earth. The first is Babylon, the one Daniel lives in. The vision in Daniel 2 was said to be for the latter times. That is confirmed by Dan 2:44 where we are told that the 10 kings of the 4th kingdom shall be in the days that God sets up his everlasting kingdom.

44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

The 10 kings are said to be part of the 4th kingdom therefore exist in the same time frame as when the Lord returns. So we know the first was Babylon and the last exists near the time of the Lord's return.

Dan 7:16 I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.
Dan 7:17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.

19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet;
20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.
21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.

Here again is the 4th kingdom in the time that the Ancient of days came and the saints possessed the kingdom. This is clearly at the return of Christ. So we are talking about the same 4 kingdoms as we were in Daniel 2.

Daniel 8

15 And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man.
16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.

19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

Daniel again asks for understanding. The angel Gabriel is instructed to make Daniel understand the vision. Daniel 8 gives us specific information on the 2nd and 3rd kingdoms. This vision is also intended for the time of the end.

20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

Kingdom number one is Babylon. The next is Media-Persia and the third is Grecia (Greek). The 4th kingdom again exists at the time of our Lord's return. He stands up against Jesus (Prince of princes) at His second coming.

25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

We are told in Dan 8:21 that the rough goat's horn is the first king. We know from history that Alexander the great was the first king of the Greek empire. Alexander died and 4 of his generals split up his empire. In Dan 8:22 we are told the horn is broken into 4 divisions just as happened to the Greek empire. Dan 8:23 says that in the latter time of their kingdom (the 4 divisions) a king of fierce countenance (AC) shall stand up.

Somewhere out of what was the Greek empire is where the AC will arise from. The interpretation given here by the angel Gabriel states that clearly. The western edge of the Greek empire only reached to modern Greece. This effectively eliminates western Europe as a candidate to produce the AC.

http://www.ancientanatolia.com/map09.htm

North and South

To further narrow down which part of the Greek empire that the AC rises from we need to turn to Daniel 11. Keep in mind that this is written by the same man that had previously received 3 dream/visions and their interpretations directly from God. The visions described what would happen to the kingdom he lived in (Babylon) and the kingdoms that followed on earth.

There were only 4 kingdoms ever mentioned. Rome could not have been the 4th kingdom because we know it exists close to the time of the return of Jesus. There is absolutely no scripture in the interpretations that indicate that the 4th kingdom will exist, be destroyed, and then exist again. Daniel already knows about the 4 world empires from the previous visions.

Daniel 11

2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.
3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.
5 And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.

Previously in Daniel 8, Daniel is told that the first 3 kingdoms are Babylon, Media-Persia, and Grecia (Greek). Dan 11:2 speaks of 4 Persian kings that stir up all against the realm of Grecia. There was a war between Greece and Persia with Greece being the victor and defeating the Persian empire.

Dan 11:3-4 tells of a mighty king that stands up and that his kingdom will be divided toward the 4 winds of heaven. This is the Greek king that stands up against the Persia king. We know from history that Alexander was the first king of the Greek empire and that his kingdom was divided into 4 portions after his death. Four of his generals each took a portion of the empire initially.

Now in Dan 11:5 we see that the king of the south was one of his princes (And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes). Alexander's general could be considered one of his princes. Further down in Dan 11 the identity of the south is given as Egypt. The northern part of the Greek empire was composed of 3 of the 4 original divisions after some battles between the 4 generals. This left the old Greek empire as being comprised of 2 primary divisions (northern and southern).

7 But out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an army, and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall prevail:
8 And shall also carry captives into Egypt their gods, with their princes, and with their precious vessels of silver and of gold; and he shall continue more years than the king of the north.

Dan 11:7-8 shows the king of the south attacking the king of the north, prevailing, and carrying spoils back to Egypt. So the king of the south is referring to Egypt. Egypt was the southern division of the broken Greek empire.

The northern division was called the Seleucid dynasty. The geographic area of the Seleucus was basically what was known as Asia Minor. This area did not include western Europe. Daniel 11 proceeds with a series of battles between the king of the north and the king of the south. Certain historic battles seem to match up quite nicely with those scriptures up until the last king mentioned in Daniel 11.

The last king is a king that will exist close to the time of the Lord's return to earth. We can know this because of this verse in Daniel 11.

31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

Here we see the AOD occurring. This we know happens at the mid-point of the last 7 years. The AOD time stamp places this king of Dan 11:31 in the last 7 years. The king spoken of in Daniel 11:31 is first spoken of in Daniel 11:21.

21 And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.

The estate that this king stands up in can be found in Daniel 11:15

15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any strength to withstand.

This king of the North is succeeded by the king of Dan 11:20 who is succeeded by the king in Daniel 11:21. This makes the king of the 11:21, a king of the north. This is also the AC. So the AC will arise out of the last of the 4 world empires, specifically out of the northern portion of that empire after it was divided 4 ways. Turkey was part of that northern division so fits that part of prophecy. There are other parts of the northern division that could qualify but when added with the specific information of Satan’s seat being in Pergamos, Turkey seems more likely the one.

Gog Chief Prince of Meshech and Tubal

There are other books of prophecy in the bible that I feel speak of the battle of Armageddon. They give some specific information on some of the nations involved in that battle. There are many views on Armageddon timing which I don't wish to get deeply into. I will present the scripture and why I feel that scripture pertains to the time near the return of Jesus. Regardless of what we call the battle, it is still clear that the events described occur near the "day of the Lord".

Ezekiel 38-39 speaks of a battle that occurs on the mountains of Israel. There is a list of names of those arrayed against Israel for this battle. God defeats this alliance and then Israel knows their God from that point forward after witnessing the defeat of this alliance by the hand of God. This has to occur before the millennium. There is no way that Israel would not know their God if He is dwelling among them ruling from Jerusalem, as will be the case during the millennium.

Ezekiel 39

7 So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.

22 So the house of Israel shall know that I am the LORD their God from that day and forward.

Both the heathen and Israel will know who God is after this battle sequence given in Eze 38-39. Scripture tells us when the nations finally know who God is. It is after they taste His utter defeat at Armageddon.

Revelation 16

14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

Revelation 19

19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

We know that Armageddon occurs in Israel in the area of Megiddo. Eze 38-39 speaks of a battle in Israel. Armageddon and the Eze battle occur near the time when God is revealed by defeating the nations in Israel. There are many parallel verses between Revelation (Armageddon) and Ezekiel (Israel battle) descriptions.

The verses of interest in Eze 38 are the ones with the names of some of those who attack Israel near the end of time.

Ezekiel 38

2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him,

5 Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:

6 Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee.

The first map shown on this website below, is one that I consider to be accurate in the locations of ancient names. Meshech and Tubal are shown to be located in what is now present day Turkey. There are many others that feel Turkey is the location of Meshech and Tubal and can be found by googling "Turkey Meshech Tubal".

http://www.teachinghearts.org/dre00maps.html

Turkey (Gog) leads the battle in Eze 38 and is aligned with Persia (Iran), Ethiopia (Sudan?), and Libya. We can see Turkey developing close ties with those regional gov'ts currently. The 3 nations positively identified in Eze 38 are all Muslim nations. Turkey is around 98 % Muslim so it would make sense that they would align with other Muslim nations.

A combination of Genesis 10 and a bit of good ole' common sense adds credibility to the concept of Meshech and Tubal being located in what we know as Turkey. Genesis 8 tells us that Noah's Ark came to rest upon the mountains of Ararat. There is a mountain named Ararat located near the eastern border of Turkey. Mt. Ararat, Turkey is commonly believed to be the location where the Ark landed.

4 And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.

Noah and his 3 sons, with their wives, were the only ones on the Ark. These 8 people first stepped off the Ark and set foot in Turkey. We know that one of the first things that Noah did was plant a vineyard. He almost certainly planted that vineyard near where the Ark landed. There wasn't a pre-built home waiting for Noah so I am guessing they used the Ark for shelter at first. The animals were all released in the area so it is highly likely that Noah and his sons lived in the area of the Ark (Turkey) at first.

Genesis 10

1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood.

2 The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.

Noah's son, Japheth, was the father of two of the men's names that I am interested in. Meshech and Tubal were two of Noah's grandsons. It is highly unlikely that with as few people on earth as there was at the time, that Meshech and Tubal settled very far away from the original Ark landing site.

Strong's concordance tells us that Meshech and Tubal were names of Noah's grandsons as well as locations.

Mesech or Meshech = "drawing out"

1) son of Japheth, grandson of Noah, and progenitor of peoples to the north of Israel

a) descendants of Mesech often mentioned in connection with Tubal, Magog, and other northern nations including the Moschi, a people on the borders of Colchis and Armenia

Tubal = "thou shall be brought"

1) son of Japheth and grandson of Noah
2) a region in east Asia Minor
a) perhaps nearly equal to Cappadocia

Cappadocia is located in central Turkey as shown on this map below.

http://www.turkeytravelplanner.com/Maps/cappadocia_map.html

This makes perfect sense that Noah's grandsons settled in the general area of the Ark landing. We know from scripture that Gog leads the invasion of Israel and that he is chief prince of Meshech and Tubal (Turkey). The invasion is defeated by the Lord Himself and then the nations and heathen will know who God is from then forward. Israel will not know their God until close to when Jesus returns. They will have to accept Jesus prior to reuniting with their God. Jesus even told the Jews before He left that they would not see Him again until they said blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord. In other words not until they accepted Christ.

Ezekiel 32 Nations

The old testament provides other scripture that reinforces the idea that a group of Muslim neighbors of Israel attack her near the day of the Lord. Ezekiel 32 lists some specific names of nations that God takes vengeance on. Meshech and Tubal are among the names in this chapter.

The following verses of Eze 32 establish the time stamp for the events described. We have an event that I refer to as the "cosmic signs". They are found in conjunction with the day of the Lord in many places in scripture. Matthew 24 tells us that these signs occur just prior to the return of Christ.

7 And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light.
8 All the bright lights of heaven will I make dark over thee, and set darkness upon thy land, saith the Lord GOD.
9 I will also vex the hearts of many people, when I shall bring thy destruction among the nations, into the countries which thou hast not known.

11 For thus saith the Lord GOD; The sword of the king of Babylon shall come upon thee.

Egypt, Babylon (Iraq), Asshur (Syria), Elam (Iran), Edom (Jordan), and Meshech/Tubal (???) are all mentioned separately. This tells us that Meshech/Tubal aren't any of these: Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Syria, or Jordan.

The Assyrian

Isaiah 10 speaks of God sending one called an Assyrian to punish the people of Israel for their sinful ways. The Assyrian becomes boastful and takes credit for what God has done. God then deals with the Assyrian for his arrogance. There are many verses in this chapter that make it clear the time setting is around the time of the end.

15 Shall the axe boast itself against him that heweth therewith? or shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it? as if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no wood.

16 Therefore shall the Lord, the Lord of hosts, send among his fat ones leanness; and under his glory he shall kindle a burning like the burning of a fire.

The Assyrian empire encompassed most of the middle east. Here is a map of the extent of the ancient Assyrian empire. The Assyrian is leading the Israel attack in Isaiah 10 much like Gog is in Eze 38. We eliminated Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Iran, and Jordan as being Meshech and Tubal in Eze 32.

http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/ancassy.htm

If we take those countries out of the Assyrian empire map then we are basically left with Turkey and the Armenian/Georgia area. We can eliminate Saudi Arabia as a possibility using Eze 38:13. Dedan (Saudi Arabia) is part of the group against Gog. There are other references of the Assyrian in the Old Testament as well. I think Armenia/Georgia can be eliminated mainly because of the lack of other scripture support.

The case for Turkey producing the AC has a strong biblical and historical foundation. Rev 2 tells us that Satan's seat was located in Turkey. Istanbul could be the city on 7 hills. Daniel 2,7, & 8 show us that there will only be 4 world empires and the 4th empire will rise out of the geographic area of the old Greek empire. Daniel 11 specifies that the AC rises out of the Northern portion (Asia Minor) of the divided Greek empire. Ezekiel 38-39 names Gog as chief prince of Meshech and Tubal which have been shown to have been located in Turkey. Gog attacks Israel near the end of time as does the AC. Genesis 10 adds support for Meshech and Tubal being located in Turkey. Ezekiel 32 eliminates Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Jordan as identities for Meshech and Tubal. Isaiah 10 depicts an Assyrian attacking Israel near the end of time. When you remove the eliminated nations from Eze 32 that leaves Turkey as the most likely candidate in light of all the supporting scripture above. There is very little doubt in my mind that the AC will be a Muslim from the middle east area.

There are a couple of misc. items I feel are related also. Turkey has the ability, via a series of dams, to completely shut off the water flow to the Euphrates river. In Revelation we are told that the Euphrates river is dried up to make way for the kings of the east. The celebration of Christmas and Easter on pagan holidays was integrated into Christianity in Turkey. There is some research that indicates that the actual location of Babel was in Turkey.

The validity of any theory is how it performs in the real world. We know that at some point Israel will sign a peace treaty with many. The one that confirms this treaty will also break the treaty at the mid-point of the last 7 years. Look out into the world today and see who Israel's sworn enemies are, they are Muslims. The peace everyone is looking for is between Israel and her Muslim enemies.

The history of the Arab hatred for Israel makes it hard to imagine Israel ever trusting them enough to sign a peace treaty. The Arabs have never recanted their call for Israel to be driven into the sea. There is one Muslim country that Israel trusts. It is Turkey. Turkey is Israel's only ally in the middle east. Turkey has recently been very active trying to position itself as a mediator in the mid-east peace process. As Turkey says, they are friends with all parties involved. Turkey has been calling for a comprehensive peace treaty involving all of Israel's Arab neighbors. Sounds like a covenant with many to me.

Peace,
Seeker

[Seeker]

Oops double post somehow, mods feel free to delete this.

Thx,
Seeker

[Mr Dan]

Thank you Seeker.

[Seeker]

No problem Mr. Dan all that should keep you busy a bit...lol. One key thing about Ezekiel 38 timing is this.

Eze 38:17 Thus saith the Lord GOD; Art thou he of whom I have spoken in old time by my servants the prophets of Israel, which prophesied in those days many years that I would bring thee against them?

God is saying that Gog is spoken about by His servants the prophets of Israel. Ezekiel wrote this around 500 BC. So some prophet before this time has information pertaining to Gog. Our quest is to find where Gog is written about in the prophets prior to Ezekiel. Find similar stories to Ezekiel 38-39 in the prophets of old. If God has written about Gog it is there somewhere. And while you are in the OT see if you can find this day also.

Eze 39:8 Behold, it is come, and it is done, saith the Lord GOD; this is the day whereof I have spoken.

What day has God spoken of?

Peace,
Seeker

[Exit40]

The Struggle for Kirkuk Turns Ugly
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 6-13-2007 15:41:44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAMASCUS -- Over the weekend, the London daily Al-Hayat published a two-part interview with Jalal Talabani, the president of Iraq. Talabani, a seasoned Kurdish nationalist and Iraqi statesman, spoke of the current conditions in war-torn Iraq, hardships during his years in the underground, and made interesting references to Kirkuk, the oil-rich city that is currently witnessing much violence and which Iraqi Kurds want to be incorporated into Iraqi Kurdistan.

In 1986, as part of his Arabization process, Saddam Hussein called for the relocation of Arab families to Kirkuk, the center of Iraq's petroleum industry, to outnumber the Kurds living there. He also uprooted thousands of Kurds from Kirkuk. Since the downfall of Saddam's regime in 2003, the Kurds have been demanding Kirkuk, something that the Sunnis curtly refuse, and are returning to the city en masse.

Some observers point to the "struggle for Kirkuk" as the real reason why the Turks are seemingly so serious about invading Iraqi Kurdistan. If given to the Kurds, the city would add tremendous political, geographical and financial wealth to Iraqi Kurds, which in turn threatens neighboring country's like Turkey, Iran and Syria.

Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, in a search for friends in Iraqi domestics, has allied himself with the Kurds and backed Article 140 which says that a referendum should be held in Kirkuk to see whether its inhabitants favor remaining part of Iraq, or being annexed to Kurdistan.

Given that authorities have started, under Maliki's instigation, to call on the 12,000 Arab families brought to Kirkuk by Saddam to return to their Arab districts, the referendum will almost certainly come out in favor of annexation to Kurdistan.

Kurdish aspirations are becoming serious - and dangerous - to Iraqi Arabs. The US is seemingly supportive of these aspirations, complicating matters all the more for Turkey, Iraqi Arabs and neighboring Iran, which is also very worried about the future of Kirkuk.

In his interview, Talabani recalled that at one point, when he raised the issue of Kirkuk with former prime minister Tarek Aziz, the latter told him that in this regard, "You [the Kurds] have one right: to weep as you pass through Kirkuk [since it will never become a Kurdish city]." Talabani replied: "Thank you Abu Zayd. You are a generous man." Aziz snapped back: "Are you joking?" Talabani replied: "No. I am not. There are 15 million Shi'ites who are deprived the right to weep on Ashura [a holy Shi'ite day]; at least you give us the right to cry."

Kirkuk came to the world's attention during the era of Iraq's founder, King Faysal I, when an oil gusher was discovered in 1927. The oil field was put into operation by the Iraqi Petroleum Company in 1934 and has been producing oil ever since, currently making up to 1 millions barrels per day (half of all Iraqi oil exports).

By 1998, Kirkuk still had reserves of 10 billion barrels. At the time of the downfall of Saddam's regime, the city (250 kilometers north of Baghdad) had a population of 755,700. In 1973, Kurdish leader Mullah Mustapha al-Barzani laid formal claim to Kirkuk, something that the regime of Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr considered a declaration of war.

By 1974, authorities in Baghdad had split the district in two, naming the area around it al-Ta'mim, and redrawing its borders to give it an Arab majority. According to Human Rights Watch, from 1991 until 2003, Saddam systematically expelled an estimated 120,000 Kurds from Kirkuk and other towns and villages, to increase their Arab population. Since coming to Iraq in 2003, the Americans have never concealed their interest in oil.

Due to numerous attacks on Iraqi oilfields in 2003-04, including the country's 7,000-kilometer pipeline system, the US set up Task Force Shield to guard oilfields, particularly in the Kirkuk district. In January 2004, the Los Angeles Times quoted Kurdish politician Barham Salih as saying, "We have a claim to Kirkuk rooted in history, geography and demographics." If this claim is not acknowledged, he added, it would be a "recipe for civil war".

Watching all of the above - and taking sides - is Maliki. The Shi'ites of Iraq are generally in a dilemma with the Kurds. The Kurds are overwhelmingly pro-American, with an alliance with the United States that dates to the 1970s under secretary of state Henry Kissinger.

The Shi'ites are not particularly pro-American. One thing that brings part of the Shi'ites closer to the Kurds is the issue of autonomy. Certain Shi'ite groups, headed by the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC) have repeatedly called for creating an autonomous Shi'ite district in southern Iraq, similar to the Kurdish one in the north.

This leaves the Iraqi Sunnis, who favor unity and Arab nationalism, stranded in the middle - where there is no oil. Maliki, who faces tremendous pressure for his repeated failure to bring stability to Iraq and disarm the militias, has one of two choices. Either he has to reconcile with the Sunnis, which is difficult given his sectarian upbringing, or with the Kurds.

Making friends with both, or continuing to alienate both, is impossible. Relying on support within his Shi'ite community is no longer enough, especially since many parties in the all-Shi'ite United Iraqi Alliance have started to lose faith in his leadership. Reconciliation with the Sunnis - in as much as this is being called for by the Americans - is difficult for Maliki.

In his heart of hearts, he does not want it. He wants to punish the Sunnis collectively because Saddam was one of them and because they refused to recognize and support a new, Shi'ite-led post-Saddam Iraq.

His alliance with Shi'ite military groups, like the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr, which has engaged in sectarian war with the Sunnis since 2004, makes a rapprochement with the Sunnis even more difficult. The friendship between Iraqi Sunnis and neighboring or regional Sunni Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt and Syria is even more alarming to Maliki, who fears that they are all conspiring to bring down his government and replace him with the secular former prime minister Iyad Allawi.

Last week, Maliki addressed Iraqi officers, calling on them to strike "with an iron fist" at whoever tried to work with outside forces against the political process (forgetting perhaps that he is a product of "outside" meddling in Iraqi affairs). Maliki's statement came after Sunni Vice President Tarek al-Hashemi openly called for neighboring Arab states to help Iraqi Sunnis maintain the Sunni and Arab character of Iraq, and wrestling it from the hands of Shi'ite politicians, militias - and Iran.

Although they had differences in the past over the distribution of power between the president and his prime minister, Maliki and Talabani have reconciled to prevent the Allawi scenario from materializing. For one thing, Allawi would never allow militias to operate - neither the Kurdish Peshmerga nor the Shi'ite Madhi Army nor the Badr Brigade of the SIIC. Nor would Allawi support the idea of further autonomy for the Shi'ites. Talabani's interview in Al-Hayat showed strong messages of support for Maliki and the Shi'ites, who in turn are reciprocating with support on the issue of Kirkuk.

Trying to defend the Iraqi Shi'ites from accusations of being agents of the Iranians, Talabani said, "I think that the Shi'ites of Iraq will never follow the Shi'ites of Iran. They are in disagreement with Iran over the issue of vilayat-e-faqih [rule of the clergy]. This is a big issue, reminding us of the international community movement and the differences between China and Russia. Najaf [located in Iraq] is the Shi'ite Vatican and not Qum or Mashad [located in Iran]. Most of the Shi'ite shrines are located in Iraq [not Iran]."

He added that as Shi'ite leaders living in Iran under Saddam did not make them agents of the Iranians: "We all resided in Iran, but that doesn't make us Iranian." Talabani was making a poor argument, claiming that it was Iran that followed Iraqi Shi'ites and not the other way around. Historically this may be correct, but in today's world, Talabani knows that Iran is an international Shi'ite superpower that has control over Shi'ites worldwide, and not only in Iraq.

Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani of Iraq, for example, is an Iranian who does not even have an Iraqi passport. In another gesture, Muqtada came out recently in favor of reconciliation with Iraqi Sunnis - something that is very difficult but which if it happens could give a great boost to Maliki's standing in Iraqi domestic politics.

A stronger Maliki means stronger support for the Kurds and the Shi'ites. Muqtada called for an end to sectarian violence and announced that after a recent attack on a Sunni shrine, he contacted Sunni leaders and offered to have his army protect holy Sunni places of worship, suggesting joint prayers between Sunnis and Shi'ites. The Sunnis turned him down, however, not for security reasons, as they claimed, but because simply they trust neither Muqtada nor his boss, the prime minister.

Muqtada then spoke of a possible coup to oust Maliki, saying that this would be a coup against so-called "Shi'itification", but added that Maliki's government was not governing in a Shi'ite manner, but was closer to being secular. He warned the Arab states that are supportive of ending Maliki's tenure in office, saying: "The Arabs need Iraq more than Iraq needs them. What is happening here can explode in their own countries."

He also denied links to Iranian intelligence. Muqtada has his own reasons for fearing Allawi since, when serving as prime minister in 2004, the man launched a ruthless war against the Mahdi Army and has promised to crush it if he returns to power. As all of this was happening, violence ripped through Iraq over the weekend, claiming that lives of over 50 people on Friday, with two car bombs in Basra and another in Kirkuk. Sunni clerics at Friday prayers accused Maliki of compliance with Shi'ite militias.

One month ago it seemed that Maliki's days were numbered and sources in Baghdad claimed that the United States had given him a deadline of June 30 to get his act together, given their great disappointment at how his Baghdad security plan had failed.

He had to end the violence, disarm the militias and reconcile with the Sunnis, or leave office. The political activity of Allawi, and his visit to numerous Arab states, highlighted speculation that he was preparing to replace Maliki and had promised the Americans to do all of what Maliki had failed to achieve since coming to power in May 2006. Things then started to change in Baghdad.

There is increasing fear that an Iraq without Maliki at this stage would spell more danger for the region as a whole, and more sectarian violence in Baghdad. In as much as the Americans want to "punish" Maliki for failing to curb sectarian violence, they also need Maliki to prevent the repetition of the same kind of violence if there is ever a cabinet change in Baghdad.

The argument now seems: having him, with all his shortcomings, is better than dealing with the unknown if he leaves office. Maliki's reconciliation with the Kurds, his stance on Kirkuk, the support of Talabani (who has President George W Bush's ear), and fear from the unknown under Allawi have seemingly sent the June 30 deadline into history. David Satterfield, the assistant secretary of state for Iraq, was quoted in Al-Hayat on June 10 as saying that Washington had complete faith in Maliki.

That brings all talk about a near post-Maliki Iraq to a halt, and automatically, heightens fears on what the future of Kirkuk might be, given Maliki's stance on the Kurdish affair, his support for the referendum and his rapprochement with Talabani. Satterfield's words turn a new chapter in "the struggle for Kirkuk" - a chapter that if carried out as planned spells trouble and violence for Iraq and the entire region.

By Sami Moubayed
www.atimes.com

http://www.aina.org/news/20070613104144.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

False Dichotomies: 'Secularists' and 'Islamists' in Turkey
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 6-13-2007 15:34:32
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Istanbul - When Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) -- a party with Islamic roots -- nominated one of its own as president, millions of protesters took to the streets. The rallies were the latest act in a drama which began when Turkey's founding fathers adopted, in addition to a commitment to eventual democratisation, the then-prevalent European view that Islam is a source of backwardness. But despite measures to purge Islam from the public sphere, it has proven resilient as both a faith and cultural anchor. And since the multiparty era, political Islam of various stripes has challenged the state line.

The AKP, arguing in the name of greater freedoms, says it can bring Turkey closer to resolving its foundational dilemma of reconciling secularism, democracy and Islam. The party stands especially for pious Muslims who wish to be observant without facing humiliation or censure. Criticised for attempts to criminalise adultery and introduce halal labelling, AKP pundits cite studies showing only a small fraction of supporters favour an Islamic state. It has also been suggested that the best insurance against party traditionalists and radical grassroots elements is the empowerment of a moderate leadership.

But many are unconvinced. Sceptics include political rivals who seek to capitalise on the anti-AKP rallies ahead of upcoming elections. Many are concerned with the concentration of parliamentary, prime ministerial and presidential power in the hands of a single party. Numerous women fear that even a sincere AKP stands for a more conservative Turkey in which they may be disempowered. Alevis--a large community of non-Sunni Muslims--are also worried.

Contradictory slogans heard at the rallies reflect the range of scepticism. Some chanted "no to shari'a, no to a coup, yes to democracy" referring to an army memorandum hinting it might act if the AKP does not do more to preserve the country's secular tradition. Many others unfurled anti-EU, anti-US slogans rooted in broader disconcertion with reforms taken to advance membership into the European Union and American Middle East policies.

And then there is the class dimension. Urban middle and upper classes, with their Westernised habits, have long been the ruling elite. In recent years, this position has been challenged by socially conservative urban migrants who have become entrepreneurs, intellectuals and politicians. They demand, like any rising middle class, a voice in governance. Pro-AKP commentators hail their dynamism and argue the recent demonstrations reflect the hysteria of a crumbling ancient regime.

But the situation is closer to one of stalemate, with the AK party commanding the largest share of the vote--but by no means a majority--and a rising share of the economy, while the old elite remains ensconced in the private sector, bureaucracy, judiciary and military. This means that mutual accommodation is the only reasonable course of action. It behoves the old elite to acknowledge that the newcomers are running the country well on many counts, from the municipal to the national level. And AKP supporters must understand that the preferences and fears of significant swathes of the population cannot be dismissed.

The class and identity struggles obscure remarkably convergent real interests. Consumption patterns of the two camps mirror one another, and both have been doing considerably more consuming in recent years thanks to reforms put in place by an IMF-affiliated technocrat which the AKP has safeguarded. Foreign investment has soared and Turkey's credibility is such that international capital appears unperturbed by recent tensions. But those gains can only be guaranteed by strengthening Turkish democracy. Here, too, the current crisis obscures common ground: there is broad consensus that illiberal elements of the 1980 constitution must go. And regardless of the EU process, most Turks agree that institutions which safeguard economic and political stability are in the interest of all.

With such incentives to cooperation, why the polarisation? The answer is lack of communication. Political leadership and grassroots organisations on both sides need to build bridges. The short-term formula must focus on averting collective disaster. Both camps should do their utmost to forestall further military intervention, which would spell economic and political disaster.

The middle- and long-term focus should be on fostering the glue of social capital: trust. One step may be simply to recognise that both sides in effect yearn for guarantee of the freedom to act according to their conscience. Recognition of this common desire may make it possible to negotiate, in time, a social bargain for each group without one impinging upon the other.

There are real philosophical and practical difficulties in reconciling secularism, democracy and Islamic religiosity. But if anyone can do it, the Turks can.

By Nora Onar
www.commongroundnews.org

Nora Onar is research associate at the European Studies Centre, St. Antony's College, University of Oxford.

http://www.aina.org/news/20070613103432.htm

God Bless

David

[Seeker]

Turkey as Mediator and Peacekeeper during Middle East Conflict: Analyzing Events of Summer 2006

Prof. Ruben Safrastyan, Ph.D. - 6/13/2007

"The Government of the pro-Islamist Justice and Development Party (JDP) that came to power in 2002 restructured the hierarchy of the basic directions of the Turkish foreign policy, which had been built up during the last 50 years. In particular, importance of the Middle-Eastern direction has been reviewed and is now one of its priorities. The Foreign Ministry of the country was instructed to improve relations with the Arab states and Iran, at the same time conserving allied relations with Israel on quite a cool level. According to calculations of the major architect of the new strategy in the Turkish foreign policy Ahmet Davutoglu, who is the chief foreign policy adviser to Prime-Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, as a result Turkey will have the opportunity to get a mediating role both in the Middle East conflict and in the controversial relations between some Middle-Eastern countries and the West. Therefore, Turkey will become a key state in the region, which will enhance its significance for the European Union and accelerate the process of Turkey's accession to that organization.".....

http://globalpolitician.com/articledes. ... id=2&sid=3

[Exit40]

Turkish Court Rejects Ecumenical Status of Orthodox Patriarchate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 6-26-2007 16:31:10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANKARA, Turkey -- A Turkish court on Tuesday ruled that the Istanbul-based Orthodox Patriarch is not the spiritual leader of the world's Orthodox Christians, and is only the head of the local Greek Orthodox community.

The court's decision, however, has no impact on his status outside Turkey. Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I is the internationally recognized spiritual leader of the world's 300 million Orthodox.

The court's verdict could help strengthen the Turkish government's position in disputing the patriarch's global role. The government has long sought to contain Bartholomew's influence, and objects to the use of title "ecumenical" or universal.

Turkey, a predominantly Muslim country that is seeking European Union membership, has long kept close tabs on the patriarch, suspicious of his close ties with Turkey's traditional regional rival Greece and other predominantly Orthodox countries.

The Patriarchate's spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment.

The ruling was included in an appeals court verdict that upheld a lower court's decision acquitting Bartholomew of charges of illegally barring a Bulgarian priest from conducting religious services. The court also upheld the acquittals of other top church leaders on the same charges.

Bartholomew, who is a Turkish citizen and an ethnic Greek, has spiritual authority over the world's 300 million Orthodox Christians and directly controls several Greek Orthodox churches around the world, including the United States.

Turkish officials however, reject any Vatican-like status for the Patriarch and says he is the religious head of the Greek community of around 3,000.

"The Patriarchate, which was allowed to remain on Turkish soil, is subject to Turkish laws," the appeals court argued. "There is no legal basis for the claims that the Patriarchate is ecumenical."

The court said Turkey could not give "special status" to any of its minority groups.

The Patriarchate dates from the Byzantine Empire, which collapsed when the Ottomans conquered Constantinople, today's Istanbul, in 1453.

The charges against Bartholomew and 12 senior clerics were first filed in 2002, by the head of a Bulgarian Church Foundation, who argued that Bartholomew had no authority to dismiss Kostantin Kostov, the Bulgarian priest.

The Bulgarian foundation had claimed the priest was punished after he refused to refer to Bartholomew in prayers and refused to conduct religious services and issue baptism and marriage documents in Greek.

http://www.aina.org/news/20070626113110.htm

God Bless

David

[Exit40]

Turkey Warns of Plans to Invade Northern Iraq
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted GMT 6-30-2007 18:58:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Turkey has prepared a blueprint for the invasion of northern Iraq and will take action if US or Iraqi forces fail to dislodge the guerrillas of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) from their mountain strongholds across the border, Turkey's foreign minister Abdullah Gul has warned.

"The military plans have been worked out in the finest detail. The government knows these plans and agrees with them," Mr Gul told Turkey's Radikal newspaper. "If neither the Iraqi government nor the US occupying forces can do this [crush the PKK], we will take our own decision and implement it," Mr Gul said. The foreign minister's uncharacteristically hawkish remarks were seen as a response to pressure from Turkey's generals, who have deployed some 20,000-30,000 troops along the borders with Iraq, and who are itching to move against the rebels they say are slipping across the border to stage attacks inside Turkey.

Among other things, Turkish military planners have been working on a scheme to establish a buffer zone on Iraqi soil to try to stop the rebels' movements.

The US and the EU regard the PKK as a terrorist outfit, but Washington is nervous of any military operations by its Nato ally that could destabilise Iraq's Kurdistan region. There are fears too that any instability in the north could play into the hands of Iran, facing growing problems with its own Kurdish population.

The PKK, which has had a presence in the remote border areas of Iraq since the 1980s, has about 2,000-3,000 guerrillas on Iraqi soil. Their camps are dotted along the densely wooded ravines and in some of the regions' many caves high up in the limestone peaks. They remain out of reach of Iraq's Kurdish authorities, who fought unsucessfully alongside Turkey in the 1990s to oust them from their bases.

Authorities in Ankara say the PKK, which declared a unilateral ceasefire last year, are behind recent bombings in the cities of Ankara, Izmir and Diyarbakir, as well as attacks on Turkish security forces in the mostly Kurdish south-east.

So far the Turkish military have confined themselves to shelling across the border and raids by units of special forces. In separate remarks yesterday, Mr Gul said, however, that Turkey was also considering air strikes against the PKK's bases in the Iraqi Kurdish mountains.

He said that, unlike a cross-border incursion involving troops and tanks, air raids would need no prior parliamentary approval. The Turkish parliament is in recess until national elections on July 22.

Mr Gul did not rule out the prospect of parliament reconvening before the elections to sanction an incursion. In a fresh bout of sabre-rattling on Wednesday, the chief of staff, General Yasar Buyukanit, asked the government in Ankara to set the parameters for an incursion across the border. "Will we go to northern Iraq just to fight PKK rebels, or, for example, what will we do if we come under attack from local Iraqi Kurdish groups?" Gen Buyukanit said.

The general's remarks rang alarm bells both in Arbil - the Iraqi Kurdish regional capital - and Baghdad, where they were interpreted as a request to also go after Iraq's Kurdish authorities, whom Turkey accuses of aiding the PKK fighters.

The Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has until now resisted the demands of his chief of staff. The priority, he argues, should be to tackle the thousands of PKK guerrillas who are already inside Turkey. Observers say the moderate Islamist is loth to put further strain on ties with Washington. US officials in Baghdad have stressed the need for dialogue to resolve the issue. Iraq's Kurdish leaders have said they are willing to help mediate. Ankara, however, refuses to recognise the Kurdistan regional government in Iraq.

Michael Howard in Sulaymaniya

http://www.aina.org/news/20070630135846.htm

God Bless

David

[njfishwatchTurkey&Isr]

Bashar Assad calls for indirect peace talks with Israel – but only after a guarantee for the Golan’s restoration

July 17, 2007, 5:47 PM (GMT+02:00)





DEBKAfile’s sources: Assad was in fact asking Israel to send officials to “proximity talks,” probably in Ankara, with Turkey playing the role of go-between. He made the offer at the inauguration of his second term as president of Syria Tuesday, July 17. The Israeli prime minister has repeatedly offered to hold direct peace talks with the Syrian ruler anywhere without prior conditions. Assad called up the case of his predecessor Yitzhak Rabin who gave up land for peace.


http://www.debka.com/index.php

[readytogo]

with Turkey playing the role of go-between

[njfishwatchTurkey&Isr]

Yep! and I was reading about the Caliphate some today and noticed that it seems that the decision to reinstate the Caliphate rests somewhat in Turkey's hands as Turkey abolished the Caliphate in 1924. The AC may end up being the Caliph. I also read this which supports that Turkey may wind up being the meidator of peace between Turkey and Syria:

Assad demanded "minimum" evidence that Israel was willing to formalize a peace agreement, citing the "Rabin Pledge," a promise allegedly made by late prime minister Yitzhak Rabin to Assad's father and predecessor, Hafez Assad, in which he unofficially gave his word that Israel would withdraw from the Golan Heights in return for complete peace with Syria.

Although the pledge was never documented, Syria still holds it as a platform for potential talks.
Assad also made reference to recent mediation efforts by a third party, but did not mention the party by name. Nevertheless, it is widely believed to be a reference to Turkey, which in recent months has "tested the waters" in Damascus and Jerusalem about a resumption of some sort of negotiations.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? ... 2FShowFull

Assad: Israel, Syria in contact through intermediary country

By Yoav Stern and Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correspondents

Israel and Syria are holding contacts through a third party, Syrian President Bashar Assad said Tuesday. Assad did not disclose the identity of the interlocutor, but it is believed to be Turkey.

Assad said a third country has recently been trying to bring Israel and Syria closer.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/883052.html

[njfishwatchTurkey&Isr]

Wow! I started reading a little about the Caliphate today... I just checked Turkeypost.com for the first time this week and guess what the third article was about? Yep.

Osama Bin Laden wants it back, as does Hizb ut-Tahrir and also, according to a recent poll organised by an American university, a majority of Muslims across the world do so too. But what is the caliphate (Arabic: Khilafah) and what would it look like today?

...

The last caliphate to be widely recognised - Ottoman Turkey, which in its latter days came to be known as the "sick man of Europe" - was abolished by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in 1924.

On Wednesday, writing on Cif, Brian Whitaker, questioned the relevancy of the caliphate in the modern world, saying:

Whatever the historical merits (or not) of this now-defunct system of government, it is difficult to see how anyone could seriously regard its return as a step forward in the 21st century.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ina ... phate.html

[Mr Dan]

Very interesting indeed.

[Exit40]

by Scott Sullivan
Turkish Elections Will Stabilize Iraq
July 17, 2007 12:00 PM EST



Presidents Bush, Barzani, and Ahmadinejad are leading Iraq and the Middle East into a major crisis. All three are destabilizing Iraq and its neighbors by supporting the PKK.

In contrast, Turkey is building a stability coalition with Syria and Russia that will deter the PKK, isolate Iran, and usher in an era of peace and prosperity for the entire Middle East. Turkey's willingness to intervene in northern Iraq to suppress the PKK is a positive sign of things to come from Ankara. Turkeys parliamentary and presidential elections on July 22 will ratify Turkeys leadership position in the Middle East.

So who will win -- President Bush, or Turkey? Turkey is winning, according to three positive signs. `

The three positive signs are Turkeys continuing hardline stance on the PKK, as noted above; the initiation of Syria-Israel peace negotiations; and Russias proposal for Russia-Turkey military cooperation.

The first positive sign of a more stable Middle East is shown by continued Turkish resistance to the PKK. Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan has surprised many outside observers by taking a hard line on the PKK. Erdogan has taken a hard line because of Kurdish president Massoud Barzani's strong support for the PKK.

Erdogan knows that if a PKK-affiliated Kurdistan emerges, Iraq will break up into three terrorist-controlled states -- PKK-controlled Kurdistan, Iranian/IRGC controlled Shiastan, and al Qaeda-controlled Sunnistan.
Erdogan also knows that Iraqs three way partition will disintegrate the Baghdad government, escalate Iraqs ongoing civil war, and provoke military intervention in Iraq by Iraqs neighbors (Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Jordan).

Indications are that Turkeys hard line anti-PKK stance will solidify following the 22 July parliamentary and presidential elections. Turkey will also oppose Barzanis political referendum that would create a new Kurdistan by joining Kirkuk city and its oil wealth to the Kurdish regional government (KRG).

The second positive sign of a stabilized Middle East is the initiation of contacts between Syria and Israel to discuss peace between the two states.

The US-Kurd-Iranian game plan was to make Turkey and Syria the new fall guys in the Middle East. The US would blame Turkey and Syria for US setbacks in Iraq.

The US is advancing this anti-Syria, anti-Turkey scenario by isolating Bashar al-Assad, even as the US upgrades its own relations with Iran.

Assad has frustrated the US isolation plan by opening direct talks with Israel. Brilliant! Now Turkey and Syria, backstopped by Russia, are free to assemble their own coalition to contain Iran and the Kurds.

In this context, the third positive sign of a stable Middle East is the recommendation of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies for military cooperation between Turkey and Russia.

Turkey Russia, and Syria are natural allies against Iran and the Iraqi Kurds. If Turkey, Russia and Syria cooperate, all the Iranian-Kurdish scheming to take over the Middle East will fail.

In fact, the first payoff from the alignment between Turkey, Russia and Syria could emerge on the Kurdish issue. Russia could meet with Barzani and urge Kurdish restraint. Although the Kurds as a rule ignore all outside advice, they may listen to Russia, a long time Kurdish sponsor.

The second payoff from a Turkey, Syria and Russia alignment will be for them to co-opt Hezbollah and Hamas, now aligned with Iran. With this one step, Turkey and Syria would abscond with Irans Middle East empire and render Iran impotent in regional diplomacy.

The third payoff from a Turkey-Syria-Russia alignment would be the potential for deployment of Arab peacekeeping forces to Iraq. Iran already has several thousand military and paramilitary personnel in Iraq, including elite units of Iran's Special Operations Forces as well as the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). Iran is using these forces to create a pro-Tehran "state within a state," in advance of the US departure. Arab peacekeepers could be deployed to protect Baghdad, Basra and Kirkuk from Iranian subversion.

In conclusion, the July 22 parliamentary and presidential elections will raise Turkey to the status of the new superpower of the Middle East. Turkey will move ahead quickly to contain the Kurds, isolate Iran, and co-opt Hezbollah and Hamas. Turkeys victory will be a triumph for US equities in Iraq and the Middle East, despite Bushs untiring support for Barzani and Iran.

http://mideastweek.com

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/26726.html

God Bless

David

[waitingformyking]

Wow.....I don't know where to begin.
There is so much misinformation on this article!
Since when did we start upgrading relations with Iran? When did we start blaming Turkey for Iraq's problems? Last I checked....Iran was also taken measures against the PKK.
I call this nothing but a "HUGE SMOKE SCREEN" for what is really happening. That article was meant for Turkey's population. Steer them away from trusting U.S. or the West. Downplay Iran and U.S.'s differences. Promote a military alliance with Russia while putting Syria on a pedestal.
This political manuevering doesn't get better than this. Next few days we won't see a U.S. and Iran relationship.....it will all be U.S. and the West causing trouble and Iran, Syria, Russia and Turkey are fed up.

[njfishwatchTurkey&Isr]

The elections this Sunday are huge. Will Erdogan and his AKP party win or will the secularist win? This could be a huge move towards Islam ruling once again. If the AKP does win, will the military step in as in the past?

[Downpour]

Two faces of modern Turkey

Ahead of Sunday's general election, the BBC's Sarah Rainsford travels to Kayseri and Izmir to report on how the country's secular system and its democracy are being tested by a shift in power towards religious-minded Turks.

At five o'clock most mornings, the elite of Kayseri are already up and working out. In the hills that surround the city they take a brisk two-hour hike to start the day.

"We always start very early," one man puffs. Striding alongside him are the city's mayor, its business leaders and its police chief. "That's the Anatolian people. They have lots of energy," he says.

Kayseri is a clean-living city, and it is also devout. In Turkey today it is pious places like this that are on the rise.

On the outskirts of the neat and tidy town, Ahmet Hasyuncu runs a successful yarn business. He's also head of an industrial estate that has doubled in size in four years and now houses more than 700 companies, most of them home-grown.

At its centre is a vast mosque. Each factory here has at least one prayer room for its workers.

"Kayseri is known as a conservative city, but it's entrepreneurial too," Mr Hasyuncu says, surrounded by swirling reels of white cotton on his factory floor.

"Our businessmen are reformist - open to change - and we keep our religion out of our work."

Most of Ahmet's trade is with the West.

Once a backwater, central Turkey - or Anatolia - seized advantage of the economic liberalisation of the 1980s to develop into a driving force of the national economy. Local businesses have become known as the "Anatolian Tigers".

The region has always been religious. But now people like Mr Hasyuncu are prospering they are creating a new, conservative middle class and becoming more prominent.

'Worrying' symbol

In strictly secular Turkey, that makes some people nervous.

"Are we really a threat to the system?" asks Mr Hasyuncu, laughing at the suggestion. "Secular Turks are trying to label us as something we're not. It's like they're seeing nightmares."

If there is a symbol of all that worries secular Turks, it is the Islamic headscarf and in conservative Kayseri covered women are a common sight.

In one room of a smartly refurbished centre run by the city council, three girls study Islamic art, their flat-nibbed pens scratching across the paper. They say they cover their heads as an expression of their personal faith. But away from here, less religious Turks are convinced the headscarf represents an Islamic political agenda.

"We face this kind of attitude very often and it makes us very uncomfortable," Emine says. "I don't think my scarf is a threat to anyone. But what can we do? It would take a miracle to change things here."

At the last election, 54% of voters here helped elect the AK party into office. Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul is a local.

Kayseri promotes itself as proof that you can be a devout Muslim and still be secular and modern.

But the fact that religious conservatives have political power now worries some people elsewhere in the country.

That worry is felt in Izmir on the west coast, where in the summer locals pack the nightclubs and the bars. Women wear miniskirts and low-cut tops here without a second thought. And there's alcohol.

Modern lifestyle

But Izmir people call themselves modern Muslims too and for them, it is secularism that is sacred - as introduced by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. He banished religion from politics when he founded the republic.

"We need to protect out modern lifestyle. We don't want very religious or conservative people to govern us," says club manager Ali Korur, as loud music pumps out across the bay from his 24-hour beach club.

Mr Korur believes the secular system guarantees his freedom. The most popular political party here in his town is the Republican opposition CHP.

"We need a leader that takes us to the West not to the East," he explains.

Back in town, Hanri Benazus sorts through photographs of the leader who first turned Turkey to face the West.

"Ataturk really was a great man. Everything that is contemporary in Turkey is down to him," he says, pointing out pictures of Ataturk in a smart suit and hat, or skimpy swimming shorts.

"Some people worry his revolution is in danger, but I think people who are used to modern life will never return to the age of ignorance."

But that fear is real for some.

When the AK party tried to put a devout man in the presidency, thousands took to the streets in protest carrying enormous national flags. One of the largest demonstrations was here in Izmir.

The government was forced to back down for now. But some suggest the crisis over the presidential election exposed a deeper division here.

"There may be two Turkeys in terms of lifestyle," concedes Professor Tanju Tosun of Izmir's Ege university.

"But step by step we are absorbing democratic values and learning to live together."

It is a delicate balancing act.

The two Turkeys have lived side by side for eight decades. But now power is swinging towards more religious-minded Turks, the country's secular system - and its democracy - are being tested.

Link

[Exit40]

Hi Waiting. You Asked ??????

Since when did we start upgrading relations with Iran?

Iran, US to hold talks at ambassadorial level: FM Tehran,

http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-2 ... 144012.htm

This is the second round of talks at this high level. Also, I have noticed a softening of rhetoric towards them since Feb 07. I have lost the link to the article but may be able to find portions of it. I suspect backdoor relations but cannot support this with facts just yet. The idea behind this is that the US does'nt want Turkey and Iran aligning militarily over the PKK, Kurdistan issue, nor to form serious energy cooperatives. The US is playing both sides of the fence here, for now.

Keep in mind, this article is an opinion from a ME analyst, and addresses just a portion of the issues there, and points out a scenario that might be possible, and in all likelihood is happening to a certain degree. Nothing is cut and dried over there, with many possible outcomes.

Upcoming events to keep an eye on are the July 22nd elections in Turkey, and the Kirkuk referendum in Iraq this Nov, if we get that far. These events are major and their outcome will affect the area for some time. Thanks for your comments.

God Bless You

David

[njfishwatchTurkey&Isr]

« Turkish Elections TomorrowTurkey’s ruling AKP wins election decisively
Well, this is it. Prophecy unfolding before us. Also see my article discussing some of the relevance here

ANKARA (Reuters) - Turkey’s ruling Islamist-rooted AK Party won 51.6 percent of the vote in a decisive national election victory on Sunday after nearly a quarter of votes had been counted, according to private broadcaster CNN Turk.


Two other parties crossed the 10 percent threshold to enter parliament, with the leftist CHP winning 15.2 percent and the ultra-nationalist MHP on 13.7 percent, it said.

These figures would give the pro-business centre-right AK Party a victory several percentage points higher than opinion polls had predicted.

http://www.joelstrumpet.com/?p=636#more-636

[water]

Yep...one eye on Turkey at all times now for sure....

[Exit40]

Turkey: Islamists pay a price for victory
By M K Bhadrakumar

Nothing can quite surprise on the Middle East's political chessboard. This has been a week in which the foreign ministers of Egypt and Jordan visited Jerusalem jointly for the first time as envoys of the Arab League, and claimed they heard "many positive responses" from the Israeli leadership.

Also diplomats from the United States and Iran discussed an unlikely alliance to fight Sunni insurgents in Iraq - provoking, in turn, a furious fatwa by Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi muftison their followers in Iraq to go and destroy the holy shrines of Imam Hussein and Hazrat-e-Abbas. Qom's venerable ayatollahs, Nasser Makarem Shirazi and Hossein Nouri Hamedani, promptly called on the United Nations to "condemn such a fatwa, which fans the flames of international terrorism".

Midway through the week, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki calmly proposed that he would be willing to "examine" an official request from Washington to raise the level of US-Iran exchanges. The Middle East's politics indeed cascaded - even if one disbelieves Thursday's Ha'aretz newspaper report that Israel is "not far from a photo-op with the Saudis".

But it still seemed audacious to suggest that Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Hamas, the United States and the European Union will make bedfellows. As results of the Turkish parliamentary election began appearing on Monday, the Middle East's main protagonists and Western power brokers found common ground to congratulate the leader of the "Islamist" Justice and Development Party (AKP), Prime Minister Recip Tayyip Erdogan, on his magnificent victory.

Revisiting 'Orientalism'
The Turkish election cast a shadow on the geopolitics of the Middle East. One of the region's experienced observers, Rami Khouri, wrote in Lebanon's Daily Star, "The lessons revolve around three related issues: the participation of Islamist parties in democratic transformations in the Middle East; the relationship between secularist nationalism enforced by the armed forces and electoral reformism supported by much of the citizenry; and how Western democracies should most effectively deal with situations in which democracy and Islamist parties rear their heads simultaneously in the Middle East.

"The election," Khouri continued with a Levantine flourish, "in one fell swoop telescoped centuries of Orientalist distortions about Middle Eastern governance and political values into a single, clear affirmation of contemporary Turkey's most important lesson for us all: it is, in fact, easy to reconcile democracy, nationalism, secularism, republicanism, constitutionalism, stability, prosperity and Islam in a single process. That process is inclusive, honest democracy, in which all legitimate players take part and the winner is allowed to govern."

But Khouri would know the equations are never quite that straightforward in his part of the world. The fact is that for the past two decades or so, mainstream Islamists have shown willingness to become part of a democratic way of life in countries as varied as Morocco, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine and Egypt. But the Arab regimes haven't felt the need to engage the Islamists. Nor is there any compulsion felt by those pro-Western regimes to make the transformation to credible democracies.

All that can be hoped for is that one day they may choose Turkey's trajectory. Even for the Western powers backing those Arab regimes, Turkey remains a solitary exception. In the Middle East, they haven't seriously engaged the Islamists. The fact of Arab Islamist sentiments being part of the resistance to Israeli aggression and occupation becomes the core issue. Indeed, in Turkey itself, if the Islamists gained power in 2002 and thereafter consolidated their popular appeal, that has been despite the West's often unhelpful attitudes.

No wonder the Hamas statement on Erdogan's victory has been a touching invocation - an ideological cry lost among the region's pragmatic reactions. Hamas insisted that the "Islamic nation is now convinced that there is no future unless it treads the Islamic path". The Hamas spokesman in Gaza, Sami Abu Zuhri, said, "The victory by the AKP signals people's leaning toward Islamic teachings. It reflects the transformation under way in the region, hankering for a return to Islamic ideals."

Erdogan would have been embarrassed. Saudi Arabia, in all its accumulated wisdom, wouldn't even venture to characterize Erdogan's victory in the idiom of religion. It dealt with the AKP in cautiously couched near-secular terms. The Saudi king and the crown prince simply congratulated Erdogan "on the occasion of the Justice and Development Party's win". Saudi commentators complimented Erdogan for his pragmatic, non-confrontational style of politics that knew perfectly well "there were lines not to be overstepped, and that he can win within the confines of the system", to quote from Al-Hayat newspaper.

Conceivably, the Saudi establishment would wish that Arab Islamists emulate Erdogan and "play the game wisely and within the boundaries of the possible". Erdogan is the archetypal "enlightened Islamic leader" for the pro-Western Arab regimes - with no propensity toward radicalism or violence and no particular inclination to provoke confrontations with the established order.

Erdogan doesn't aspire to claim Ottoman Turkey's mantle of religious leadership in the Middle East, though in his first term as prime minister he led Turkey back to the center stage of the Organization of Islamic Conference. Thus, in more ways than one, Erdogan can be "a friend of the Arabs and can become an ally of theirs", Al-Hayat wrote. The London-based Saudi daily's columnist added, "Arab governments should cooperate with it [AKP] ... I know that countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia are going in that direction."

Old wine in new bottles
Turkey's non-Arab neighbor Iran, on the other hand, has specific concerns. The Iranian president and foreign minister telephoned their Turkish counterparts and felicitated them, but strictly confined their remarks to Iran-Turkey relations. The Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman stressed that Turkey's elections are its internal matter, and "Iran respects whatever decision taken by the Turkish nation". It is difficult to be certain whether Iran even considered the AKP as an Islamist party anymore after its transformation as a "rainbow coalition" on the eve of the recent election. Certainly, Iran did not appear to view the Turkish election as a momentous contest of "Islam versus secularism".

What bothers Tehran is the Erdogan government's regional policy, which is of profound consequence to Iranian interests. Tehran's preoccupation, therefore, is on the foreign-policy directions of the new government rather than on the "cultural" aspects. But Tehran needn't expect any major surprises. Despite Erdogan's apparent pro-West outlook, Turkey's foreign policy may not after all reflect such tendencies. The relatively impressive performance of the ....................

MORE

God Bless

David

[Seeker]

Excellent article David, thx! I found much of it interesting but this section especially so.

Conceivably, the Saudi establishment would wish that Arab Islamists emulate Erdogan and "play the game wisely and within the boundaries of the possible". Erdogan is the archetypal "enlightened Islamic leader" for the pro-Western Arab regimes - with no propensity toward radicalism or violence and no particular inclination to provoke confrontations with the established order.

Erdogan doesn't aspire to claim Ottoman Turkey's mantle of religious leadership in the Middle East, though in his first term as prime minister he led Turkey back to the center stage of the Organization of Islamic Conference. Thus, in more ways than one, Erdogan can be "a friend of the Arabs and can become an ally of theirs", Al-Hayat wrote. The London-based Saudi daily's columnist added, "Arab governments should cooperate with it [AKP] ... I know that countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia are going in that direction."

I was wondering how Turkey was going to reconcile with Saudi and radicals like Hamas. It seems the whole world is looking to Turkey as a model to follow in the middle east. Interesting times indeed. Great find David.

Peace,
Seeker

[Exit40]

Hi Seeker. Yes, good article. The author, M K Bhadrakumar, seems to have a good handle on the developing ME. I'm not so sure that Erdogan isn't interested in establishing the Caliphate in Turkey though. A couple of items tht will be tricky for him to play, 1) getting the Kurdish situation under control. 2) getting the Hamas/Hezb'allah under control.

I think a military incursion into Iraq is in the works, albeit a limited one, possibly in alliance with Iran, which will be followed by negotiations with the autonomous Kurds in Iraq, leading to a settlement of some sort in the region which will undoubtedly include development of the Kirkuk oil fields and pipelines etc, with Turkey. The forthcoming peace there will allow the US to withdraw more troops gracefully, and set up an alliance with Iran to contain the rest of the Iraq. Peace in the region followed by the free flow of oil. So who is the hero then ? Plus this would lead to a better relationship for Erdogan and the military/deep state, another tricky alliance he is trying to form.

Syria is the key to Hamas/Hezb'allah. With Iran in their pocket Syria will follow and the result could be the eventual establishment of the Caliphate in the region, so neccesarily Saudi Arabia must join in order to have their influence felt, and keep the oil money spread around. Oil means money and power, the name of this game, and peace in the region is a neccesity to it, leading to a peace treaty with many.

It seems almost ominous to watch this unfold. One thing that really strikes me is the seeming consolidation of power in the region, with Turkey striving to be energy central for supplying the West. With a powerful control of the West's energy it could be just a matter of time before they could put a strangle hold on the flow, and who can make war without any fuel ? Said David refering toRev 13:4

Anyway, it's just my thoughts.

God Bless You

David

Maybe you could email this article to JR ?