Patriots missiles, which were prominently deployed on Turkey's border with Syria as a result of 'big bargainings' are being withdrawn. Germany is worried both for the lives of the soldiers on duty at these bases, due to PKK terror groups, and is also feeling uneasy about the operations against the PKK. When it comes to the U.S., which made life miserable for Turkey just to deploy the Patriots, we don't know what their problem or plan is yet. It is probable that nobody cares at all. But Turkey was turned into a base for Middle East operations of the U.S. Moreoever, we were made dependant on the U.S.
This is not a conspiracy theory. I recall what Morton Abramowitz, who was one of the masterminds of AKP, a member of CIA and Ambassador to Turkey during 1991 Gulf War, said in 2000:
"The U.S. demanded three things from Turkey during the 1st Gulf War. The most important demand was Turkey's letting them use the bases. This was maybe the most controversial issue in Turkey at that time. Because many people in Turkey was opposed to declaring war against Iraq, no matter what.
Turkey did not like the allies' air operations very much, as it didn't want to see a Kurdish region being governed independently from Iraq. The U.S. had to spend a lot of diplomatic effort when, twice a year, the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) was discussing the possiblel renewal of permission for the U.S's controversial air operation.
The Gulf War and ongoing military operation against Saddam Hussein led to Washington's re-adopting the same formal perspective regarding Turkey. That perspective dates back to the 2nd World War: Turkey's political and strategic importance which also included using Turkish bases for Middle East operations."
Abramowitz also made a prediction:
"It can be said that Turkey's 3 southern and northern neighbours, which are Iran, Iraq and Syria, will have radical changes in the next 10 years. Military cooperation will still be the main factor that affects the thinking style of the countries' leaders. Turkey will feel dependant on the U.S. if these hostile neighbours develop weapons of mass destruction."
WHAT WAS KÜRECİK AND PATRIOTS' USE?
What happened then?
The missile defense system was smoothly deployed in Kürecik in early 2012… Patriots arrived at the end of the same year… Now the time has come for İncirlik, which will be used in the same way…
Let's remember Kürecik:
The party in power promised that it was not going to be used againt Iran and Syria… But it turned out that it was set up against Iran and Syria.
The party in power said the system belonged to NATO, not the U.S. But the treaty was signed with the U.S. Ambassador, not NATO.
The then PM Recep Tayyip Erdoğan issued a challenge saying: "We accept the system only if the control and button of the missile are in our hands. Otherwise, nobody would expect us to agree."
The U.S. responded: "The control of the missiles is going to belong to NATO." Erdoğan said, "We wanted to hand over the control of the missiles to NATO."
It was announced that the information derived using Kürecik would not be given to Israel… The U.S. announced that they had the right to share the info with the allies.
When MPs from CHP wanted to enter the base, it was noted that the Foreign Ministry, National Defense Ministry and Turkish General Staff had no right, although the Pentagon was the 'competent authority.'
After 1 year, the former U.S. Ambassador to Ankara Eric Edelman explained how Turkey was 'persuaded' in terms of Kürecik, saying "Kürecik was a difficult decision for Erdoğan":
"The foreign policy of Turkey and the U.S. are mainly on the same line. For instance, it was an important decision to deploy a radar system in Malatya. It was vital for the protection of the U.S. forces and allies. It was a very challenging decision for Erdoğan. President Barack Obama intervened in person to persuade him. In fact, it was not such far gap between the two allies. But it has a positive effect on the bilateral relations."
What about Patriots?
November 2012. PM Erdoğan was in Bali. When asked about the allegations that Turkey had demanded that Patriot missiles from NATO be deployed on Syrian border, he responded:
"I don't know anything about that. If we want to take those missiles, there is Defense Industry High Coordination Council in charge and I am the head of it. It has 2 members, one of them is Minister of Defense and the other is Commander of armed forces. If there is such a thing, we should know about that. But we don't. The Reuters news agency is making up this news, just like the things a deaf person says are based, not on what s/he hears, but on what s/he thinks. But we know one thing: If the General Secretary of NATO says 'If Turkey demands that, we are in favour of it.' But we haven't had such a demand so far. Also I should be clear that we are not thinking of buying Patriots now."
Those were Erdoğan's words, but the FM Ahmet Davutoğlu confirmed that 'there were some initiatives.'
The result: Just after 15-20 days, Erdoğan said "If we have to demand, we will. Necessary steps will be taken. The region under threat is NATO's as well as Turkey's" and announced the cities where Patriots would be deployed. AKP Vice Chairman Hüseyin Çelik also said that the 'trigger of the Patriots would be in the hands of Turkey.
We have seen who has been holding the trigger. They came. They are done now and taking the Patriots with them…It may be true that they were useful for bringing Iran to heel and getting Turkey to get used to Patriots on the way to İncirlik. But do we know what has happened in the last 2- 2.5 years and foreign soldiers have done in those critical cities?
WAS İNCİRLİK AN EAVESDROPPING BASE FOR GERMANY AND THE U.S.?
CNN Türk channel made an interview with Chief of General Staff Necdet Özel and asked whether there was a possibility of using İncirlik as an intelligence base or not on November 25, 2011.
Özel replied: "This is out of question. The status of İncirlik base is determined in treaties."
After 8-9 months, New York Times published an article saying CIA agents were active in Turkey. In addition Reuters claimed that Turkey had set up a secret base in Adana to cooperate with Qatar and Saudi Arabia to send military and intelligence aid to the rebels in Syria.
German papers also wrote:
"German intelligence agency BND's agents are eavesdropping on telephones in İncirlik. A source from the U.S. said BND's sources in Syria were better than any other agencies."
It was alleged that there were nuclear bombs in İncirlik base and 4th Main Jet Base. Fikret Bila, from Milliyet newspaper, asked this very question to Özel on January 5, 2012 and here is the answer he got:
"I can't answer this as it is a secret issue."
WAS İNCİRLİK ERDOĞAN'S 'HARDEST DECISION'?
The year is 2015. İncirlik has been opened to the U.S. for fighting against ISIL. Coalition forces like Britain, France, Australia and Gulf countries are waiting for Turkey's 'invitation' as well. As Deputy Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL said, that 9-month-long bargain came to an end after Obama's talk with Erdoğan on the phone.
Let's wait and see which former ambassador or CIA agent will say opening İncirlik was Erdoğan's 'hardest decision.'
The ones who don't submit computer programs controlling F-16 systems and weapons in case they are used against PKK, swing the lead in terms of drones and Predators and casting doubt on intelligence sharing are now coming to Turkey in full equipment.
Deputy Special Presidential Envoy Brett McGurk said those in his interview with Verda Özer from Hürriyet newspaper:
"There is not a legal representative of PYD in military coordination centre in Erbil yet." This means there is a illegal one.
"We are very careful about how we use our air force. Now we are including Turkey to this operation, which means Turkish F-16s will land from Turkish bases. We will include Turkey into this operation as soon as possible." What a favor!
In addition to his words as to how the relations between Pentagon and the Armed Forces got sore after Hood event in 2003 and warmer 'thanks to' opening İncirlik, McGurk also said:
"We are in cooperation with Turkey, international coalition, Syrian partners and Iraqi partners on the field."
Who are those partners? PYD and Peshmerga!.. So Turkish armed forces are working with them, aren't they?
Upon those words, diplomatic sources denied 'a potential intelligence sharing and alliance with PYD' and said:
"When Ankara started taking part in anti-ISIL air operations, it will hit the targets determined using information from its own intelligence network. Of course we will inform the U.S. about those targets. They can inform PYD about which targets we will hit. Or they will not. It is the U.S.’ business."
What things have our officials not resisted since Kürecik?..
Turkey and the U.S are allies… PYD, which Erdoğan calls as 'a terrorist group just like ISIL', is an ally of the U.S. PKK is holding indirect talks with the U.S. in order for them to be the 'arbitrator for ceasefire' and demands some 'guarantees'…
The course of events are clear, but what did Erdoğan and Ankara take in exchange to clear the way for those events?
If Turkey had not taken anything, then what is the meaning of this 'compulsion, neediness and surrender'?
Erdoğan is right about de facto system change. But not after 'Turkish people voted for choosing the president on August 10, 2014', but opening İncirlik!..
Pro- government authors continue saying- “Turkey is in a national struggle. We are breaking the 100-year-long siege.”
This must be how ‘national struggle’ is written in AKP alphabet!