SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
234 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·



Turkey indicated Thursday during a meeting of NATO ministers that it could approve the deployment of a proposed U.S.-led anti-missile system on Turkish soil, though it expressed reservations about the project.

“We demanded that Iran and Syria not be cited as ‘threats’ in NATO’s official documents on the planned defensive shield,” Turkish Foreign Ministry officials told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review on Friday. “Also, the deployment of the shield should cover the territory of all NATO allies, as well as the entire territory of Turkey.”

Turk soldiers ‘role models’ for Afghan recruits, NATO commander says

The defense and foreign ministers of NATO member countries gathered in Brussels on Thursday to discuss a new “strategic concept” that will shape the alliance’s new vision to face new threats. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu and Defense Minister Vecdi Gönül attended the event, where they met with their U.S. counterparts, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, to talk about extending the alliance’s missile-defense system against ballistic threats from Iran and North Korea.

Ankara told the U.S. officials that if defense is the purpose of the system, no nations should be named in NATO documents as targets, since that would provoke those countries, according to the same diplomatic sources.

“In that case, Turkey could face problems with its neighbors due to the missile shield,” diplomatic sources told the Daily News.

The technical discussions on the issue will continue until the NATO summit Nov. 19-20 in Brussels, where a decision is expected to be made.

“This is not a reservation, but the conditions needed for negotiation. We are negotiating the terms of it, and naturally parties are presenting their opinions,” Defense Minister Gönül told reporters Friday.

Recalling that Turkey was assessing the compatibility of the proposed missile system with Turkey’s own missile capabilities, Gönül said one important concern for Turkey is how the NATO missile shield would affect the national missile system and what kind of cost advantages it would bring. He said the proposed NATO missile-shield system could bring significant cost reductions for Turkey.

“The missile shield is a defense system, so it can’t target any country,” Gönül said, responding to concerns that the missile shield targets Iran.

NATO leaders are expected to sign the strategic concept, which will replace a document written in 1999, at the November summit. The draft of the new strategic concept has been delivered to the alliance’s members, and Turkey has voiced objections to the wording of the documents, which specifies certain countries, including Iran, as threats.

The United States has been talking to Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania and Bulgaria about the planned missile shield, which it intends to deploy under the auspices of NATO.
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=turkey-conditionally-approve-for-missile-shield-2010-10-15
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
234 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Ankara seeks guarantees on Israel in missile shield talks with US



Ahmet Davutoglu (L),Missile defense system plans were discussed during a NATO meeting of defense and foreign ministers in Brussels on Oct. 14.

Turkey, in talks with the United States over a proposed missile defense system, has asked US officials whether non-NATO countries would have access to intelligence that sensors in the shield would gather, sources close to the negotiations have told Today's Zaman. US authorities, in return, have assuaged Turkish concerns, saying the intelligence will be out of reach for any non-NATO countries, including Israel.

Long-time NATO member Turkey has been holding discussions with the US over the proposed missile defense system. Although Turkey has not publicly rejected US requests to take part in the system, it is concerned that a possible deployment of anti-missile elements in its territory could harm its relations with Iran, which has drastically improved its economic and security ties with Turkey in recent years.

US officials have said on more than one occasion that the missile defense system is meant to address a growing missile threat from Iran, a statement that rattles Turkey, which insists Iran should not be mentioned as a threat in the proposed Europe-wide anti-missile system. The clock is ticking for a final deal as NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen presses for a NATO decision on the matter during the alliance’s upcoming Lisbon summit on Nov. 19-20.

Turkey says it is not against establishment of a missile defense system for NATO’s European allies but insists in talks with the US that the project should be built for defensive, not offensive, purposes. Any clear reference to Iran or any other neighboring country as a threat in the proposed missile defense system runs counter to Ankara’s chief foreign policy objective: “zero problems” with neighbors. Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu is convinced that there is no need to mention any country as a source of threat as threats keep changing fast in today’s highly unpredictable world. Thus, dealing with the threat as it emerges is the practical choice. Sources said the Turkish argument looks reasonable to US authorities. Naming countries a source of threat is difficult in a practical sense, too, because NATO operates by principle of unanimity and it is not possible to classify a non-ally as threat if one of the allies is opposed. But the level of understanding permeating the ongoing negotiations is not enough to say what the final agreement will look like when the Lisbon summit convenes. Sources say even though there might be no formal reference to Iran in any written document, US officials may do so verbally in press statements during the summit.
Instant access to intelligence

Missile defense system plans were discussed during a NATO meeting of defense and foreign ministers in Brussels on Oct. 14.

Turkey also requests participation in decision-making and instant access to intelligence on any missile threat to be collected by sensors that will be deployed as part of the missile shield. The US has principally given the green light to the Turkish request for instant access to information but work is still under way to decide how the mechanism would work.

Another issue that came up in the negotiations was whether there would be any ships operating as part of the missile shield in the Black Sea. The proposed anti-missile system is planned to be mostly ship-based in earlier stages, with elements being deployed on land later. Ankara says terms of the 1936 Montreaux Convention, which severely restricts the passage of non-Turkish military vessels through the Straits, should be respected, thus no ship carrying missile defense system elements can pass through the Straits to reach Black Sea.

The US authorities have given assurances that there is no such plan since terms of the 1936 deal are clear. The missile defense system plans again put Turkey in a foreign policy dilemma over its ties with Iran. Western experts say Turkish refusal to join the proposed system would deepen concerns over an “axis shift” in the Turkish foreign policy, while participation in a system openly targeting Iran would disrupt Turkey’s zero-problem with neighbors policy and undermine its regional role. Many in Turkey believe that protecting Israel from a possible missile attack by Iranians is the secret purpose of the US-pioneered missile defense system. But Israel is not a NATO member and thus cannot receive protection from a NATO system. Israel also does not need protection from NATO as it already has its own national missile defense system that could counter threats from Iran or other possible enemies.

In fact, given the unpredictability of the security situation across the globe, it is possible that the missile defense system could even be used against Israel some day in the future. NATO is an organization that operates on the principle of collective defense and an attack on an ally is considered an attack on the entire alliance.

Relations between former allies Israel and Turkey took a nosedive following an Israeli offensive in Gaza in the winter of 2008-2009, which resulted in death of about 1,400 Palestinians. The tensions peaked when Israeli commandos killed eight Turks and one Turkish-American on an aid ship trying to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza on May 31 and relations have been at a standstill since then.

The proposed missile defense system, is much cheaper but also less capable than a dedicated anti-missile system proposed by the Bush administration, which caused a deep rift with Russia. Russia opposed the stationing of powerful radars and anti-missile batteries near its western borders. But it has not opposed the new system, although Russian officials have said it remains to be seen whether the two networks can be integrated.
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/n...n-israel-in-missile-shield-talks-with-us.html
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
22,342 Posts
Why not just outright say no to the missile shield and let them be deployed in Bulgaria and Romania?

If Iran is not seen as a threat why have the defence shield in the first place, who is the government kidding, do they believe that the shield is for defence against an alien attack or something?

Also do they think Iran is stupid or something? Afterall, actions speak louder than words.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
234 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
This shield is for a NATO Member.We still have nuclear (Jupiter) missiles installed on the ground which first purpose was to defend Europe against Soviet Russia or even to attack Soviet Russia.

Now this new anti-ballistic missile shield is against any threat and bird coming from the Middle East :) ,from the view of the USA, but Turkey doesn´t see Iran as a threat.Iran has nothing to be worried.It is just a defending shield,not a targeting one.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,926 Posts
Who is USA afraid of in the mideast? S.Arabia, Iraq, UAE or Iran? Your conclusions never make sense somehow...
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
22,342 Posts
exactly, and allowing the shield to be stationed in Turkey means acknowledgement of this, however much they try to take it out of the declaration. the declaration is honest, it is openly stating that one of the reasons the shield is being initiated is the Iranian threat, our government is trying to force NATO to be as dishonest about this as themselves.

Whether Iran is mentioned in the declaration or not, the shield is being built primarily as a counter measure to Iran (and Russia), and accepting this shield means accepting that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, and Iran knows this as well, so if the Turkish government is serious it would not allow the shield to be stationed in Turkey, but it will and it will try to get away with it but I don't think Iran will be fooled.

Our foreign policy has truly become a carpet salesman style negotiation procedure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,129 Posts
Since when has the Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI) become the "NATO Missile Shied"... Or are they supposed to be two different things now???

The SDI is a proposterous Cold War bluff that the US feels as though it must carry out, primarily I imagine to protect its hegemonic status and to project its power (any excuse to build bases in foreign states). States that are signing on to this "treaty" are merely "bandwagoning" on the US' power.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
234 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 · (Edited)
The Nato Shield is also in the interest of Turkey.There were some months ago negotiations with Russia about S-300 anti-missile systems.Even Syria has bought some of them and Iran was worried about the channeled deal with Russia.

Even Greece has a better airspace defense system than Turkey.We only have low-and midrange ballistic systems.Dunno what happened with the planned S-300 or Patriot Systems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
216 Posts
Anyway if Iran (or any Middle Eastern country) would launch an attack on Turkish soil this missile shield would be pretty much worthless because the rockets are deployed in Romania and the system would be not fast enough to get the missile.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,926 Posts
^^WTF, in Romania? What would be sense of such an huge investment then? You must be wrong...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
216 Posts
There was an article about it in DIE ZEIT. I will post the link later.
But as I said they claimed that the missiles will be deployed in for example Romania and Turkey will just get the radar (not sure about the correct term).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
234 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
NATO States admit a common missile shield at the Nato Lisbon Summit



Obama: Missile defence shield for all Nato members

A missile defence system covering all Nato countries has been agreed at the alliance's summit in Lisbon, US President Barack Obama has said.

The shield would cover all Nato members in Europe and North America.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11711042
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top