TURKEY PREPARING TO BREAK SILENCE ON THE US CARGO

S E C R E T ANKARA 001906

SIPDIS

STATE PASS TO EUR/SE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/01/2015
TAGS: MOPS MARR PREL PGOV TU
SUBJECT: TURKEY PREPARING TO BREAK SILENCE ON THE US CARGO
HUB REQUEST?

REF: 16 JUNE 2004 WALD/BASBUG LETTER

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


1. (S) Following nine months of silence since the US formally
asked Turkey to allow the US to establish a cargo hub at
Incirlik Air Base for the transit of cargo in support of
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation Iraqi Freedom
(OIF),recent public comments by Turkish officials may
suggest that a decision is forthcoming. Press coverage of
the June 2004 cargo hub request was reinvigorated following a
March 23, 2005 comment by ruling Justice and Development
Party (AKP) MP Murat Mercan during a panel discussion at the
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy in Washington
suggesting that a decision on the US request would be made
"very soon." (Note: This has been the talking point with
visitors since December.) Other GOT officials have made
subsequent comments reinforcing this idea. In a public
statement on March 28, Government spokesman Cemil Cicek noted
that the issue was not raised during the March 27 Cabinet
meeting but could be discussed at the next meeting, and on
March 29 several papers suggested that PM Erdogan will
receive a briefing on the request.


2. (S) Press speculation on the reason for a positive GOT
decision ranges from a GOT extension of an olive branch to
mend bilateral relations or of a sweetener to encourage USG
and Congressional efforts to vote down the annual Armenian
Genocide Resolution when it comes up for a vote in April.
Some of the press reporting has included wild exaggerations
of what we requested, including suggestions we want to use
Incirlik to attack Iran or Syria. Whether this is
anti-Americanism at its worst, or some PR ploy to allow the
government to portray whatever it finally approves as sharply
constrained, is not clear.


3. (S) We would normally conclude that nine months of
inaction is the Turkish equivalent of a "no." But it does
seem to us that there may be movement. Although Turkish
officials have not approached the Embassy directly to discuss
the cargo hub, Deputy Director General for Americas Affairs
Suna Ilicak did suggest to PolMilCouns that a GOT decision to
favorably consider limited Incirlik access requests from the
UK and South Korea boded well for the US request. However,
government officials have found multiple pretexts for
delaying approval, variously claiming that public statements
by visiting US officials complicated the decision or
suggesting that the US should provide something in return,
such as kinetic action against the PKK in Iraq. Whether the
current flurry of press reports signals something different
or will also fade away, remains to be seen.


4. (S) Given the history, post believes that further
inquiries on our part will not advance the GOT decision
process and could be misconstrued by the Turks as suggesting
we have no alternative to a hub in Turkey, providing them
with a perceived bargaining chip on other issues. We
therefore plan to refrain from raising the matter with
Turkish officials and suggest that military and Washington
agencies also respond on the cargo hub only if asked. We
also suggest that in any discussion we stress that the
facility is useful but not essential for our missions. We
will continue to watch the Turks struggle with this issue
until they reach a decision or until USTRANSCOM informs us
that a hub at Incirlik would no longer be useful.


5. (U) Baghdad minimize considered.
EDELMAN