Turkey's involvement in NATO peacekeeping operations

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

TURKEY'S INVOLVEMENT IN NATO PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS

turkey mission tactical humanitarian

Huseynli H.A.

teacher, Baku State University

In Turkey until November 2002, the DSP-ANAP-MHP (Democratic Left Party-Motherland Party-National Movement Party) coalition was in power. After the November elections AKP (the Justice and Development Party) had the opportunity to organize the government alone. A new era in Turkey's foreign policy has begun with the Justice and Development Party's coming to power. At the beginning of 1990, the Neo-Ottomanism, which came to the political scene along with Turgut Ozal, gained the capability of doing it in the example of AKP. Ahmet Davutoglu, who was an intellectual brain behind the AKP's foreign policy in April 2001, in his book "Strategic Depth", pointed out the reason why Kemalism foreign policy was problematical and wrote, “The renewal of Ozal's Neo-Ottomanism is “inevitable” Balcэ A. Tьrkiye dэю politikasэ: ilkeler, aktцrler, uygulamalar. - Эstanbul: Зэnar Matbaacэlэk v? Yayэncэlэk, 2015. - S. 257.. Undoubtedly, this kind of change in the foreign policy course of Turkey could not in fact be ineffective in relations with the US in the case of NATO. Taking into consideration both Turkey's future activities and the political course of its own state, the United States has made serious strides in the case of NATO's structure, membership and function. In particular, the USA took advantage of using the term "war on terror" to legitimize aggressive steps through alliance. Therefore, what has happened also affected Turkey Tьrk Dэю Politikasэ. Cilt 3. - S. 307..

When the Bush administration in the United States (2001-2009) decides that the aggression policy is the key to the solution of the 11 September events, it has begun to turn NATO into an instrument for the implementation of this goal more readily Siyasi Aзэdan NATO'yu Bir Kere Daha Yeniden Yaratmak. - http: //www.nato.int /docu/....../html.

This process was not merely a step towards the geography of the former East Bloc, but also encouraged NATO to launch new activities. NATO took on a mission in Afghanistan, conducted tactical exercises in Iraq, carried out patrol operations in the Mediterranean, financially supported African Union peacekeepers in Darfur, and provided humanitarian assistance to Pakistan. In the 1990s, NATO, of which the main object, is "out of area or out of business," has long turned its back on debate over the borders and has become a global organization in the early years of the 21st century. NATO developed Partnership for Peace with the countries of the former Eastern bloc. Starting from 2004, it has established organizational relationships with "Contact Countries" such as Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, and Pakistan. NATO created a mechanism of dialogue with the Mediterranean countries. It has established relations with the Gulf Cooperation Council within the framework of the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, shared a position with Israel, which Israel could maneuver in the East Mediterranean NATO ve Tьrkiye'nin Gьncel NATO Konularэna Эliюkin Gцrьюleri. - http://www.mfa.gov.tr/ii_-nato-ve-turkiye_nin-guncel-natokonularina-iliskingorusleri.tr.mfa.

In the 2000s, the US authorized representatives supported NATO's idea of organizing contacts with the above-mentioned countries in the form of a formal partnership, given the following:

- cooperation with the above-mentioned countries (Contact Countries) on NATO's various operations;

- performing a joint mission in areas such as the Balkans and Iraq;

- carrying out tactical exercises for some of them and so on.

Following the September 11 terrorist attack, the North Atlantic Council held a meeting as we mentioned in the previous paragraph. For the first time in the history of NATO, Article 5 on common defense has been applied to and the work concerning its fulfilment has been done. AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) aircraft assigned to NATO began to contribute to controlling the American airspace with a mission called the Operation Eagle Assist. Thus, for the first time in the history of NATO, it has performed an operation on the American continent. Despite all of its allied support for the United States, Washington refused to fulfill its occupation of Afghanistan through NATO, and showed the political problems faced with other allies during the Kosovo crisis in 1999 and the technical and military discrepancies with allies encountered in the implementation of joint military operations as reasons. However, the main reason was another: The United States, which defends the principle of unilateralism in foreign policy, was pleased with the support that it provided within NATO and the use of Article 5, as well as taking advantage of the "legal privileges" that September 11 events provided, decided to occupy Afghanistan alone. Turkey was also one of the allies who supported the United States in this process. Fighter aircraft belonging to NATO countries carried out a seven-month patrol flights for US airspace control from mid-October 2001 to mid-May 2002. Turkey also sent a pilot to show support Cправочник НАТО. - Брюссель, 2006. - С. 27.. The main essence of Turkey's support was the threat of terrorism. Turkey believed that subsequent developments would contribute to the fight against the PKK. However, these hopes did not justify themselves. The US completed its occupation in Afghanistan in October 2001, defeated the Taliban leadership, and established control over Kabul and its surroundings NATO Mьdahalesi ve Sonrasэnda Afganistan // BЭLGESAM analizi/Orta Asya dergisi. 2014. - N 1176. - S. 1-8.. Nevertheless, the main issue was to be able to continue this situation. The United States tried to secure its allies, and then attempted to include NATO into this occupation process to secure stability in the country. After a while, the forces that were established in December 2001 and called the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) were not limited to Kabul, but expanded its activities throughout Afghanistan. Regional Restoration Groups were established in 2004. Turkey has taken on several important commitments in the Afghanistan mission, which began with ISAF and followed by the leadership of NATO. From January 2002, he joined the mission here with a force of 1,400 and led the ISAF (from June 2002 to February 2003) for eight months ISAF'эn komutasэ Tьrkiye'de // “Hьrriyet” gaz. 2002. - 18 haziran.. In February-August 2005, Turkey, which re-admits its leadership as a liability, also organized the protection of Kabul airport. Turkey, as a NATO country, did not carry out only military functions in Afghanistan, but also Turkey Regional Restoration Group supported the military exercises, health, agriculture and training of Afghan police. Another important significance Afghanistan in the framework of NATO for Turkey was the fact that former Foreign Minister Hikmet Зetin was appointed as NATO's Civilian Representative in this country since January 2004 and has been extended four times this time (2003-2006). The place of Turkey's mission in Afghanistan was different from other NATO countries, as it was a Muslim country, as well as had historical ties with Afghanistan. Hikmet Cetin's successful dialogue with the Afghan people was a significant contribution to NATO's image problem in the country. It is also known that some NATO officials have made trips to Kabul by wearing a Turkish flag on official transport, taking advantage of this positive image of Turkey https://www.nato.int/docu/review/2005/issue3/turkish/art1.html.

After the September 11 terrorist attack, the first NATO summit was held in Prague in 2002 and the main topic of the summit was terrorism. Apart from the decision to expand the Prague Summit, which was considered as a renewal summit, the Prague Capabilities Commitment was adopted at the request of the United States and decided to take preventive measures in various technical areas. NATO's European allies have compromised their defense spending over a long period of time and were dependent on NATO-US capabilities, as clearly seen in the Kosovo intervention. The United States has been pushing other NATO members to expand their military capabilities since the 1990s. For this purpose, in the Washington summit of 1999, there was taken measure as “Defense Capabilities Initiative”, but it did not yield any results. The pressure and demands of the United States to achieve greater development in the field of air transport and to take preventive measures against terrorism were of particular importance as part of the transformation of NATO into a global organization. The Republic of Turkey supported this decision because of its unanimous agreement with the United States on "capacity building". In total, Turkey has undertaken obligations in 25 fields. In Prague, the "NATO's military concept for defense against terrorism” was also adopted. NATO has also prepared a Partnership Action Plan with the countries of Partnership for Peace. For this reason, it was decided to cooperate with allied members and partner countries in the following areas:

- broader exchange of intelligence information;

- border security;

- military training and maneuvers against terrorism;

- increasing the ability to combat terrorist attacks Prague Summit Declaration. - http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2002/p02-127e.htm.

Strengthening the possibility of US invasion of Iraq and the subsequent developments have led to the results that affected both NATO and Turkey's position in NATO. The Bush administration's stance on Iraq and the ongoing war preparations have also raised the likelihood that Iraq will attack Turkey. The position of Bush administration concerning Iraq and the ongoing war preparations also increased the probability that Iraq will attack Turkey. The same situation occurred during the Gulf War of 1991, when NATO made an immediate decision by for the delay of some European allies, including Germany. According to the decision, it was expedient to dispatch the “Patriot” missiles from the ground and to send the NATO Allied Air Forces to Turkey in order to distract them Molla A. Soрuk Savaє sonrasэ kцrfez krizleri ve Tьrkiye-ABD-NATO iliєkileri // Yцnetim ve Ekonomi Araюtэrmalarэ Dergisi. 2009. - sayэ 11. - S. 36..

Considering this, the Turkish government has requested the use of the provision of consultations between allies prior to the case of any attack described in Article 4 of the NATO Charter in January 2003. A diplomatic crisis took place inside NATO, when France, Germany and Belgium vetoed this request USA openly supported. Even Nicholas Burns, a US representative in NATO, accused France of "gambling with the future of NATO" https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/167/35198.html. The French and German governments were actually afraid of the idea that "they also support the US occupation of Iraq" by accepting Turkey's request. At last, on February 19, 2003 persistent efforts of the United States bore fruit. As a result, these three countries were convinced that the decision was only about Turkey's defense, the United Nations would support the Iraqi crisis in its quest for a peaceful solution and that the Iraq war was not supported. Officially, execution of Article 4 of the NATO Charter was permitted. In this direction, according to a so-called "Stability Demonstration Operation" 4 "AWACS" early warning aircraft from the bases in Germany and five Patriot air defense batteries from the Netherlands were brought to Konya Tьrkiye'nin de Awacs'э olacak // Milliyet gazetesi. 2003. - 28 єubat.. In the background of these events, the Iraq war began in 2003. The next summit in the war is scheduled to be launched in Istanbul this time. The agenda of NATO's Istanbul Summit in 2004 explicitly explains why the event took place in Istanbul: NATO would declare expanding its activities towards the Middle East in Turkey, the only member of the Middle East. In fact, Ambassador Burns, the U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO spoke about this activity in his speech in Prague in October 2003. In his speech, Burns stated, "NATO's main task is to protect Europe and North America, as well as to focus on it and direct the military to the east and the south." The Secretary General of NATO also stressed the importance of expanding NATO's activity in the Mediterranean and Middle East countries at the Istanbul summit. All issues discussed at the summit were related to both Turkey and its neighbors, both geographically and in terms of the subject. When evaluating the issue differently, Turkey had a historic opportunity to become a coordinating center between Brussels and Baghdad, Kabul and the Gulf. Four important meetings were held at the Istanbul summit. 46 NATO members, including the NATO-RF Council, the NATO-Ukraine Commission, and the former Eastern Bloc and former Soviet Republics, attended the meeting of the North Atlantic Council, which is NATO's supreme decision-making body. Important decisions were taken at the Istanbul Summit to turn over NATO's military presence in the Balkans to the EU, focusing its attention to the Middle East, and expanding its activities towards the Caucasus and Central Asia. The most important aspect of the summit was the fact that it coincided with the USA's Iraqi invasion and the Greater Middle East Project. Another decision adopted at the summit was the creation of a NATO Training Mission in Iraq in 2004, with the leadership of the Netherlands initially sending a 60-member squadron NATO: The Istanbul Summit / House of Commons Library Research Paper 04/60. 2004. - 46 p.. This number then reached 300. The USA's act on trying to give NATO a duty in Iraq mostly pleased Turkey. Expanding its activities towards the Middle East, NATO would need Turkey more that it would increase Turkey's place and importance within NATO. In this regard, the Turkish government has also joined NATO's training mission in Iraq with two officers; in addition, more than 110 Iraqi officers have been trained in Turkey http://www.nato.int/cps/ru/natohq/topics_7932.htm.

Compared to the previous century, the 21st century, which is seen by the emergence of more problems for Turkey, requires the revision of relations with NATO in recent years; the benefits of cooperation with NATO have been questionable. In any case, Turkey, without or within NATO, will continue to have problems. The reason is 13 of the world's conflicting regions are located in areas close to Turkey. There is no other way from to be more powerful state and to pursue balanced policy while put this factor in mind for today and for the future.

Размещено на Allbest.ru