We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner


It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


 

Syria and Turkey - a step closer to conflict


Forum Editor
Resolved

Likes # 0

The Turkish parliament has authorised troops to cross the border into Syria if the Turkish government feels it is necessary.

This represents a distinct tightening of the finger on the trigger as far as Turkey is concerned, and I think it only needs one repetition of the incident in which two women and three children were killed in a border town by Syrian shelling for Turkey to react militarily.

NATO has condemned Syria's 'aggression' and demanded that it ceases, but Syria isn't a NATO member, and is unlikely to take any notice. Russia has simply asked the Syrian regime to acknowledge the 'tragic accident' and give an assurance it will not happen again.

A family friend is working in Ankara at the moment, and she tells me the atmosphere there is 'very tense'. She thinks the Turks would not hesitate to enter Syria if another shell falls on Turkish soil.

Like this post
morddwyd

Likes # 0

*"UN Security Council resolutions have provided the mandate for NATO’s operations in the Western Balkans and in Afghanistan, and the framework for NATO’s training mission in Iraq. More recently, NATO’s operation to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack in Libya in 2011 was carried out in support of UN Security Council Resolution 1973. "

I'm well aware of that (and the subsequent, didn't want to quote the whole post).

My point is that it has no basis in international law, and is not within the terms of the Charter.

If the Almighty himself had authorised NATO to go into Libya, that does not make it right.

NATO was set up as a purely defensive alliance, not a European Police Force.

We were not defending any NATO member in the Balkans, in Afghanistan or in Libya.

In Turkey, if, God forbid, it should come to that, we will be.

We have had this argument before.

I stand by the original terms of the charter (I can remember it being signed!), you and others, think the world has moved on.

So be it.

Like this post
Proclaimer

Likes # 0

It would not surprise me at all if Turkey asked for and received NATO forces in the near future, and that later on we learn about some International Intelligence Agency Deal that was done to get those NATO Troops into Syria, to end that civil war in a manner that the UN could not.

Like this post
john bunyan

Likes # 0

The whole Middle East looks depressing, Israel / Iran: Turkey / Syria: Iraq and Libya not very stable, Afghanistan and N, Pakistan uncertain after the ISAF pull-out. Tribalism is going strong,

Like this post
Woolwell

Likes # 0

Proclaimer It would surprise me if Turkey asked for NATO forces. They have a large army of their own and a capable air force. More likely would be the provision of support in the form of arms and intelligence.

Like this post
Proclaimer

Likes # 0

Woolwell; I understand that Turkey don't need help and have a large, modern standing army, I am just suggesting that Intelligence Agencies in the West have brokered a secret deal with Turkey to call upon NATO help to enable 'boots on the ground' in Syria. Something that the UN have been unable to do so far that NATO could achieve.

Like this post
sunnystaines

Likes # 0

I thought turkey had locked up its generals on charges of plotting a coup, looks like they might get a "get out of jail card" if the syria saga goes on.

Like this post
Proclaimer

Likes # 0

fourm member; Is there a treaty between them that would allow Russian Troops into Syria? If not then I would expect loud sabre rattling and Political fallout only should my wild theory be true at all.

Like this post
Woolwell

Likes # 0

Russia has a naval base at Tartus in Syria. They have a lucrative arms trade with Syria.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

mordwydd

**"I stand by the original terms of the charter (I can remember it being signed!), you and others, think the world has moved on. So be it."**

That's because the world has moved on, and very considerably - with the full agreement of both NATO and the UN. Both organisations have realised that modern situations require modern solutions - apparently you haven't.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

"Putin continues to support Assad and while that is the situation NATO won't consider going in to Syria."

NATO will not consider going into Syria at all, unless it receives a request from a member country under attack, or unless it is supported by a resolution of the UN security Council.

Russia has tried to avoid any further UN involvement by insisting that the recent UN statement referred to the Turkey/Syria situation's threat to 'stability in the area' rather than the UN's preferred phrase which was 'international security'.

Like this post

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



IDG UK Sites

Windows 10 release date, price, features. The next version of Windows will run on everything:....

IDG UK Sites

An Apple fan's perspective on the Windows 10 launch

IDG UK Sites

Sensor-laden kids' watch with 3G launches in Japan

IDG UK Sites

2014 Retina iMac release date rumours, specs and features: 27in 5K Retina iMac 'launching this mont'......