Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09ANKARA854
2009-06-19 07:37:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Ankara
Cable title:
COUNTER PIRACY: TURKEY READY TO CONTRIBUTE MORE
how-toTim W Hayes 06/19/2009 01:38:02 PM From DB/Inbox: Tim W Hayes Cable Text: C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 00854 CXsofia: ACTION: POLEC INFO: DCM POLM AMB DISSEMINATION: POLX CHARGE: PROG VZCZCSFO475 PP RUEHSF DE RUEHAK #0854 1700737 ZNY CCCCC ZZH P 190737Z JUN 09 FM AMEMBASSY ANKARA TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9919 INFO RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RUEUITH/ODC ANKARA TU PRIORITY RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 3839 RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY 7258
C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 000854
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/19/2019
TAGS: PARM PREL MARR TU
SUBJECT: COUNTER PIRACY: TURKEY READY TO CONTRIBUTE MORE
NAVAL ASSETS TO NATO FORCE, OPPOSES LOWERING THE BAR FOR
ENTRY INTO CONTACT GROUP
REF: A. STATE 58579
B. STATE 58992
Classified By: Pol Mil Counselor Anthony Godfrey for reason 1.4 (b, d)
C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 000854
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/19/2019
TAGS: PARM PREL MARR TU
SUBJECT: COUNTER PIRACY: TURKEY READY TO CONTRIBUTE MORE
NAVAL ASSETS TO NATO FORCE, OPPOSES LOWERING THE BAR FOR
ENTRY INTO CONTACT GROUP
REF: A. STATE 58579
B. STATE 58992
Classified By: Pol Mil Counselor Anthony Godfrey for reason 1.4 (b, d)
1. (C) Turkey strongly supports NATO's Operation Ocean
Shield and pledged a Turkish naval vessel to deploy together
with the Standing NATO Maritime Group 2 to the region. That
was the message we received loud and clear from Cagatay
Erciyes, head of the MFA's Maritime Affairs Section and
Turker Ari, head of the MFA's NATO section. Ari was quick to
point out that the new contribution would be in addition to
the Turkish frigate already deployed to the region, currently
serving as the flagship of CTF-151.
2. (C) Turkey shares our opposition to an international
piracy court, but would not dismiss out of hand a proposal to
create some sort of regional court. We suggested that the
arguments against an international court were just as valid
against a regional court. Ari agreed, but explained that
Turkey did not want to appear to be rejecting an idea put
forward by another member of the Contact Group before it had
been properly aired. He did not expect the idea of a
regional court to succeed.
3. (C) We took the opportunity to air the idea of "moving
beyond membership" in the Contact Group. Erciyes said that
Turkey would be wiling to give such ideas a fair hearing, but
would look for a substantive debate on a formal proposal.
While Turkey's "red line" against Cyprus membership remained
in place, Erciyes said the more relevant issue was force
contribution. He expected the fight against piracy to last
for much longer than a few months. The cost of contributing
naval vessels was high. If we lowered the bar to allow
lesser contributions for participation in the Contact Group,
we should expect states which are currently providing naval
forces to opt for less costly contributions. Turkey's view
was that states capable of contributing forces should not be
given the option of being free riders.
Visit Ankara's Classified Web Site at
http://www.intelink.sgov.gov/wiki/Portal:Turk ey
JEFFREY
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/19/2019
TAGS: PARM PREL MARR TU
SUBJECT: COUNTER PIRACY: TURKEY READY TO CONTRIBUTE MORE
NAVAL ASSETS TO NATO FORCE, OPPOSES LOWERING THE BAR FOR
ENTRY INTO CONTACT GROUP
REF: A. STATE 58579
B. STATE 58992
Classified By: Pol Mil Counselor Anthony Godfrey for reason 1.4 (b, d)
1. (C) Turkey strongly supports NATO's Operation Ocean
Shield and pledged a Turkish naval vessel to deploy together
with the Standing NATO Maritime Group 2 to the region. That
was the message we received loud and clear from Cagatay
Erciyes, head of the MFA's Maritime Affairs Section and
Turker Ari, head of the MFA's NATO section. Ari was quick to
point out that the new contribution would be in addition to
the Turkish frigate already deployed to the region, currently
serving as the flagship of CTF-151.
2. (C) Turkey shares our opposition to an international
piracy court, but would not dismiss out of hand a proposal to
create some sort of regional court. We suggested that the
arguments against an international court were just as valid
against a regional court. Ari agreed, but explained that
Turkey did not want to appear to be rejecting an idea put
forward by another member of the Contact Group before it had
been properly aired. He did not expect the idea of a
regional court to succeed.
3. (C) We took the opportunity to air the idea of "moving
beyond membership" in the Contact Group. Erciyes said that
Turkey would be wiling to give such ideas a fair hearing, but
would look for a substantive debate on a formal proposal.
While Turkey's "red line" against Cyprus membership remained
in place, Erciyes said the more relevant issue was force
contribution. He expected the fight against piracy to last
for much longer than a few months. The cost of contributing
naval vessels was high. If we lowered the bar to allow
lesser contributions for participation in the Contact Group,
we should expect states which are currently providing naval
forces to opt for less costly contributions. Turkey's view
was that states capable of contributing forces should not be
given the option of being free riders.
Visit Ankara's Classified Web Site at
http://www.intelink.sgov.gov/wiki/Portal:Turk ey
JEFFREY