IS TURKEY CONSIDERING MILITARY INTERVENTION IN

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 006256

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/01/2014
TAGS: PREL IZ
SUBJECT: IS TURKEY CONSIDERING MILITARY INTERVENTION IN
IRAQ?

Classified By: Ambassador Eric S. Edelman for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).


1. (C) Summary: According to Turkish press reports, the
Turkish military is drawing up plans to intervene in northern
Iraq should the situation in Kirkuk spiral out of control.
These same reports claim that the USG has given the green
light for such an intervention. TGS leadership has publicly
denied this, and MFA officials claim to be ignorant of any
such plan. Such an intervention would be a foreign policy
disaster with no good consequences for Turkey (much less Iraq
and the region). We surmise senior Turks leaked the story to
the press to underline the depth of their concern that Kurds
will essentially overrun Kirkuk and use it as the basis for a
viable independent Kurdish state, which would be viewed here
as an existential threat to Turkey's own territorial
integrity. End summary.


2. (U) The Turkish press has recently reported that the
Turkish military was drawing up plans for 20,000 troops or
more to intervene in Iraq if the disorderly flow of Kurdish
IDPs into Kirkuk continued unabated. The Oct. 30 edition of
the newspaper Cumhuriyet quoted an official Turkish source as
saying that the operation would not take place until after
Dec. 17, when EU leaders will decide whether to commence
accession talks with Turkey. The Turkish military would have
the dual role of dealing with the Kurds in Kirkuk and with
PKK/Kongra-Gel terrorists in the Kandil Mountain area.
Further, the article claimed that the U.S. was prepared to
give the green light to this intervention. Presumably as
evidence for this claim, the article notes recent statements
by the Ambassador that we share some of Turkey's concerns
regarding the importance of a peaceful, orderly process to
redress Saddam's forced emigration from the region. Finally,
the story noted that the Turkish National Security Council
(MGK in Turkish)--a mixed body of the most senior Turkish
military and civilian leaders--had discussed the military's
plan at its Oct. 27 meeting. Later Oct. 30, MFA Spokesman
Namik Tan denied that Turkey plans to intervene and called on
the international community and Iraq to cooperate in working
toward Iraq's territorial integrity and national unity.


3. (U) The Nov. 2 edition of the newspaper Sabah quotes a
senior diplomatic source as outlining a five-point plan for
Kirkuk:

--Turkey will wait to see the outcome of January elections in
Iraq.
--Turkey will maintain that a referendum on the future of
Kirkuk would be illegitimate, as it will be unduly influenced
by the large influx if Kurds to the region.
--FonMin Gul will seek support for its position from other
Iraqi neighbors at the Nov. 22-23 Cairo conference.
--Turkey will monitor the activities of the Iraqi Property
Claims Commission in Kirkuk.
--If "undesired developments" occur in Kirkuk, Turkey will
intervene militarily.


4. (U) At a Nov. 2 press conference, TGS DCHOD General Ilker
Basbug denied these stories: "At the moment the Turkish Armed
Forces have no plans for intervention in northern Iraq," he
said. Perhaps more importantly, Basbug denied that the U.S.
had in any way given the green light for such an
intervention. However, Basbug noted that Turkey is watching
developments in Kirkuk quite closely, since conflict there
could lead to civil war in Iraq, which would in turn directly
affect Turkish interests.


5. (C) At a small farewell luncheon hosted by the Ambassador
on Nov. 2 for outgoing MFA Undersecretary Ugur Ziyal--also
attended by UK Ambassador Westmacott, incoming MFA
Undersecretary Ali Tuygan, and Deputy Undersecretaries Baki
Ilkin and Nabi Sensoy)--Westmacott reported that the MGK's
new civilian Secretary-General, Yigit Alpogan, had told him
that the MGK had not/not discussed a military plan to
intervene in Kirkuk at its Oct. 27 meeting. The senior MFA
officials present at the luncheon all denied knowledge of any
such plan. The Ambassador thanked the officials for MFA
spokesman Tan's Oct. 30 comments.


6. (C) Comment: The Turkish press is notoriously inaccurate
about many things, but we wonder if much of this recent,
disturbing reporting is the result of leaks from some senior
Turks--either military or civilian--who wanted to emphasize
the depth of Turkish concern about Kirkuk. Many Turks fear
that Kurds will overrun Kirkuk and turn it into the political
and economic center of an independent Kurdistan. They would
view this development as an existential threat. Of course, a
Turkish intervention absent both IIG and coalition blessing
would severely damage Turkey's relationship with Iraq, the
U.S., the EU, and the entire region; in short, it would be a
foreign policy disaster and many Turkish officials surely
recognize that. Moreover, it is unclear what Turkish forces
would be expected to do in Kirkuk, assuming they got there;
throughout the 1990s the Turkish military conducted
cross-border operations against the PKK and rarely ventured
further than 10 miles from the border.


7. (C) Comment, cont.: The fact remains that the Turks
believe their concerns about Kirkuk are falling on deaf ears
in both Washington and Baghdad. We need to send a clear
message--as the Ambassador did with DefMin Gonul on Nov.
3--that their intervention is not an option but that we and
the IIG also have concerns about developments in Kirkuk and
are working to maintain stability there.
EDELMAN