A terrorist by any other name

IT HAS become apparent in recent weeks, if it wasn't already clear enough, that in the fight against international terrorism Turkey is caught between a rock and a hard place.
On one side there is the so called Islamic State (IS), known throughout the world as a terror group which has spread across Syria and Iraq with close ties to groups within Yemen, Nigeria and Somalia, where a terror attack on Sunday by one of its affiliates Al Shabaab destroyed one of the key hotels for journalists, diplomats and expats in the capital of Mogadishu.
On the other is Turkey's long running enemy the Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK). Since 1984 the campaign for an independent state launched by the PKK has left approximately 40,000 dead, most recently with two Turkish police officers last week.
Where Turkey faces a serious issue however is how these two terrorist groups are perceived beyond its boundaries. Kurdish fighters in Iraq are proving to be the front line of combat operations against IS, while Turkey has repeatedly refused to commit ground forces to the battle. Many believe that the Kurds importance in the battle, and the support for their semi-autonomous state in Iraq, have given a renewed credence among international players to demands for an independent state in Turkey.
In response to this dual threat Turkey called a meeting of NATO allies to discuss operations to protect itself from further attacks.
Ankara may find support limited among its allies though. Accusations have already been levelled at the government for allegedly using airstrikes in Iraq as a cover for also attacking Kurdish units. Recent reports from the area have suggested that Turkish tanks may have deliberately fired across the border into Iraq targeting Kurdish units.
For many Western nations the threat from IS is an overwhelming fear and they are prepared to forge the dirtiest of alliances to combat it, while also keeping their hands as clean as possible by allowing any else to carry out ground offensives on their behalf.
With a startling lack of understanding about the harm which the PKK has caused to Turkey, and the threat it poses to the country's long term security, it seems likely that many NATO countries will prefer to obfuscate and leave Turkey trapped between two evils rather than risking a fighting ally.
Turkey's resistance, not completely unreasonably, to see a difference between two terror groups threatening its sovereignty may place it add odds with the self interests of states looking for an easy end to the IS conflict.

Danger if destabilisation as PKK armed

BRITISH involvement in Iraq is threatening long term stability in region according to some analysts.

British Defence Minister Michael Fallon has warned that military intervention to combat the threat from Islamic State extremists could last for months. 

The news, which broke on Sunday, comes in the wake of confirmation that the British government would aid the supply of arms to Kurdish fighters in the region, something which has led to fears about the long term implications for stability in the war torn area.

The defence secretary told service personnel at the South Cyprus RAF base in Akrotiri: "There may well now be in the next few weeks and months other ways that we may need to help save life [and] protect people and we are going to need all of you again and the surveillance you are able to give us,"

"We want to help the new government of Iraq and Kurdish forces. We want to help them stop the advance of IS and stop them from being terrorised.

"This is not simply a humanitarian mission. We and other countries in Europe are determined to do what we can to help the government of Iraq combat this new and very extreme form of terrorism that IS is promoting."

It is the arming of Kurdish fighters which is proving a controversial tactic, however, amid fears that once the current situation is resolved it could lead to long term conflict on the borders with Britain's NATO ally Turkey.

Richard Gowan, research director of the Centre on International Cooperation, at New York University, said: "There are moments in fast-moving crises when you simply have to stop events spiralling out of control, and worry about the consequences later. This is one of those moments. Arming the Kurds may be a step towards the final fragmentation of Iraq, with worrying consequences for Turkey and Iran. But if the alternative is losing more territory to Isis and allowing more atrocities, then this is still the best short-term option available."

Turkey has fought a long battle against the Kurdish terrorist group the Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK), which wants more autonomy for Kurds within Turkey. Despite a tenuous peace between the group and the government in Ankara an influx of weapons and munitions from the West could destabilise the current situation.

“Wars are always a very important catalyst for change . . . In a year’s time the position of the PKK is going to be much stronger than it is now,” said Henri Barkey, a former US State Department official.

Officials in Ankara have been quick to play down the perceived influx of PKK fighters into Iraq, with one spokesmen stating: “I don’t think their involvement is real,” a senior Turkish official said. “It looks more like a media campaign than a real military campaign.”

As Britain becomes more active in the crisis and its reliance on Kurdish fighters increases the military campaign may become more apparent. Calls are already growing for the PKK to be removed from British and US lists of terrorist organisations as their fighters become crucial in the battle for Iraq. With possible legitimacy, training and British supplied weapons Mr Fallon may be creating a long term issue for which he is unprepared to deal with.