Turkey was screwed by FRANCE

Publication:The New York Sun; Date:Mar 26, 2003; Section:Front Page; Page:1


How France Blocked U.S. In Ankara

MICHAEL LEDEEN



Everybody knows that Turkey did not permit America to stage operations from Turkish bases, but hardly anybody realizes that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, the vote was not an Islamic protest against the American-led coalition,but an act of anti-American intimidation by France and Germany.

The Turkish government, which for the first time since the fall of the Ottoman Empire is based on an Islamic party, fully expected that Parliament would approve its proposal that America be given the use of Turkish air bases in the Iraqi war.The government was so confident that the party failed to demand internal discipline, and thus several deputies voted against the resolution.

But that does not account for the failure to approve the government¡¯s proposal.

Primary blame for the defeat of the measure lies with the opposition ¡ª the secular, Kemalist parties that have governed the country since Ataturk.

Contrary to expectations, the opposition, responding to orders from party leaders, voted unanimously against the government¡¯s position.

The leaders insisted on a disciplined "no" vote because of pressure ¡ª some would call it blackmail ¡ª from France and Germany.

The French and German governments informed the Turkish opposition parties that if they voted to help the Coalition war effort, Turkey would be locked out of Europe for a generation. As one Turkish leader put it, "there were no promises, only threats."

One can describe this behavior on the part of our erstwhile Old Europe allies only as a deliberate act of sabotage against America in time of war.

It is even worse than the behavior of France in the Security Council ¡ª first joining with us to give Iraq a "really, really, last chance" and then preventing us from acting as if the language of Resolution 1441 meant what it said.

It is of a piece with the exertions of French diplomats to "convince"African countries to vote against us in the U.N.

I think that when the events of the past few months are sorted out, we will find that French actions constitute the diplomatic equivalent of chemical and biological warfare.

Monsieur Chirac has stopped at nothing to try to prevent the defeat of Saddam Hussein, no matter how many American lives it cost.

And, more often than not, the Germans tagged along for the ride.

It is hard to imagine that such actions were solely the result of greed, whether personal or national.

To take such action, Mr. Chirac must have conceived of a French future not only independent of the United States, but in open opposition to us.

To be sure, he does not speak of France alone, or of the Franco/German entente, but rather of "Europe."

But he sees Europe as an extension of French power, not as a federal union in which all states will be free to pull their weight and pursue their sometimes diverging interests.

Thus, his rude insults to the Central European countries who joined with Spain, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands and the others who support our efforts to liberate Iraq.

If they want to be part of Europe, he said, they should just shut up.

This is all part of the tectonic shifts taking place all over the world.

President Bush the Elder intuited the emergence of a new world order once the Soviet empire fell,but it is only now that we can begin to see the profundity of the changes and the magnitude of the challenges we will face in the immediate future.

To blame a transformation of such magnitude on the diplomatic style of this administration, as so many of President George W. Bush¡¯s critics do, is to personalize, and thereby trivialize a world-historical event.

We¡¯d better understand it, and fast.
http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/g...Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2003/03/26&ID=Ar00106