Turkey's PPK Issues Another Diversion To Middle East Issues
Reader comment on item: [Mosul and] Iraq's Next War

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Nov 1, 2007 at 15:56

If one were to go back and begin a re-analysis of the Middle East situation from before World War One, we can see that much of the politicking that went on from there until now shows a gross misunderstanding by the Western political powers of Middle Eastern issues. We look at how the British influences of each of the separate areas that make up the Semitic and non-Semitic elements of the Middle East are seemingly the center focus of the crises facing the world interventionists today. No big surprise there, for it is all documented. Only interpretations of the documented events vary.

Turkey's loss of Ottoman territory is no less inconvenient than the reconfiguration of the Austro-Hungarian Empire producing Yugoslavia (later to disintegrate into the current separate subcomponents), the land exchanges between France and Germany and Germany and Poland (fought over during WWII), or on the Ottoman front again, Allenby's entry into Jerusalem (really a bigger and more explosive situation in the current context).

Given General Abizaid's recent comments about the United States being involved in the Middle East for another fifty years (not very well received by Americans, not to mention other national and international entities desiring to maintain a certain vassalhood status over the region), if Turkey's assertion that the Mosul should be re-annexed the same way Kuwait was to be re-annexed to Iraq and Iran continues to woo the Shiite elements of Iraq into collaboration, General Abizaid's assessment of the situation may be the understatement of the 21^st century. Not to worry, his focus was on the centerpiece of the current American political dilemma, the will of being for, or against the Iraq war, in order to gain a presidency.

No one is really looking at the full situation of the Middle East in what General Abizaid is saying, but therein lies the true crux of the crisis. Iraq is a diversion, to keep the United States' attention away from the true center of the world's greatest problem, whether or not to divide Israel, or to eliminate the nation altogether. Once that sparks (over a nuclear issue, by the way) into a full confrontation where all will be faced with the consequences of that episode, Iraq's problems of how to regain independence from Iran, Syria, Turkey and whoever else, will become a footnote in history, the same way Sarajevo was to World War One and Czechoslovakia was to World War Two. Add to that another affront to the war on terror, the Russian objection to a missile defense system in Europe aimed at Middle East threats (Iran?), and how that supports the reason why no one, no one in all of humanity, is going to solve the worlds' problems in the Middle East.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.