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.

The West needs Iran against IS

AMID the chaos of the Islamic State assault on the Middle East the meeting of Britain and Iranian leaders offers a moment of historic potential.

The meeting in New York between Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and British Prime Minister David Cameron will be the first time that leaders of the two countries have held official meetings since 1979. 

For the millions of people under constant threat in Iraq and Syria the news of potential cooperation between the state, once considered one of the most dangerous in the world, and the rest of the allies opposing the threat of the IS the news cannot come soon enough.

Hundreds of thousands of refugees are flooding into Turkey as the fighting in Syria heats up and the first time since the start of the conflict American airstrikes have been used against IS forces in Syria. It is clear that the battle against the group is entering a dangerous new phase, far beyond that of the murder of western hostages.

At the weekend former British Prime Minister, and current Middle East Peace Envoy, Tony Blair released a 6500 word article on his Faith Foundation website calling for a ground incursion against fighters in Iraq and Syria. 

Laying out a seven point plan to combat the threat of global extremism Mr Blair makes repeated attempts to link unrest in China with a common problem of extremist Islam in the Middle East. As such he argues that it is only through joining with China that the West can show they are not the only ones fighting rising fundamentalism. His plan hinges on demonstrating that it is a global battle against such groups.

Mr Blair missed talking about how much more successful this plan would have been if it involved Iran in operations. Instead he did call for arguments about human rights in Egypt to be quietened down as we link arms to fight against terrorists. 

Working with Iran is only contentious due to historically imbedded ideals. Relations are already thawing and while talks on nuclear programmes have not met desired results for either side they are still continuing.

Potential cooperation has become all the more important as Turkish involvement in the fight against the state remains understandably cool. Unlike the West Turkey must look at the terrible prospect of IS success in the region. 

For Turkey the fight against IS has long term consequences no matter the outcome. Clashes with Kurds at the weekend are yet more evidence of the tenuous position its government is in. 

For the West arming and supporting Kurdish fighters seems a way of avoiding placing its own ground troops in harms way. For Turkey, however, it poses long term security implications as Kurds demand more autonomy from Ankara.

By bringing Iran into the battle all out Turkish involvement may be avoided while still demonstrating that this is a war not against Islam but against evil. 

ISIS aren't just another terror threat

BRITISH Prime Minister David Cameron has issued a stark warning that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has planned six terrorist attacks in Europe.

His warnings come as sources close to the security services revealed that they have identified the insurgent known as Jihadi John, believed to be responsible for the murders of American journalists James Foley and Stephen Sutloff.

In a statement to MP's Mr Cameron said: "The point I would make even today to the British people is: be in no doubt about the threat that so-called Islamic State poses to us. We have already seen something like six planned attacks in the countries of the European Union from [Isis], including of course that appalling attack in the Brussels Jewish museum, where innocent people were killed. That flows directly from this organisation."

While ISIS, which is also known as Islamic State (IS) and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), may be planning attacks against the West it would be far too simple to think of them as just another terrorist organisation.

ISIS may have started out as an offshoot from Al-Queda, however, it has now morphed into something all the more dangerous and insidious.

"This is not a terrorism problem anymore,” says Jessica Lewis, an expert on ISIS at the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington think tank. “This is an army on the move in Iraq and Syria, and they are taking terrain.”

"We are using the word encircle,” Lewis tells TIME. “They have shadow governments in and around Baghdad, and they have an aspirational goal to govern. I don’t know whether they want to control Baghdad, or if they want to destroy the functions of the Iraqi state, but either way the outcome will be disastrous for Iraq.”

ISIS's metamorphosis creates an issue in the way in which the British government, and nations as a whole, need to combat them. Traditional methods of dealing with a terrorist threat has involved cutting off supply and removing leadership. In the case of ISIS these are unlikely to work though. Due to the territory it has taken and the armaments it continues to capture it has essentially become self sustaining in terms of supply. While it has a powerful leader in the form of  Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi it is increasingly clear that his removal would have little impact on the long term effectiveness of the group with a replacement likely waiting in the wings. 

The British government has already confirmed that it will supply arms to Kurdish fighters and the Iraqi government waging a war against the spread of ISIS.

The Prime Minister has said: “I have always said we would respond positively to requests from them for the direct supply and we are now prepared to do that and so will be providing them with arms, as the Germans and others will.

“Also with allies, we think it’s right to step up our training and mentoring efforts and so we’ve said we would be willing if they would like to train a battalion of Peshmerga fighters because they are doing such a vital job.”

As the conflict continues though more may need to be done. While another military intervention in the Middle East is less than palatable it may become necessary as the group becomes viewed as an occupying army rather than a terrorist group.