Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 05ANKARA3198 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 05ANKARA3198 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Ankara |
| Created: | 2005-06-08 14:47:00 |
| Classification: | CONFIDENTIAL |
| Tags: | MARR SU TU NATO |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 003198
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/03/2015
TAGS: MARR, SU, TU, NATO
SUBJECT: TURKEY CONSIDERING NATO AIRLIFT FOR AFRICAN UNION
IN DARFUR
REF: A. STATE 104289 (NOTAL)
B. ANKARA 2697
Classified By: Acting Counselor for Political-Military Affairs Maggie N
ardi for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
1. (C) On June 6, PolMilOff called on MFA NATO Military
Affairs Head of Department Alper Coskun to discuss ref a
demarche. Coskun responded that Turkey wants to approach
this issue constructively. He said that Turkey understands
that this would not be a Berlin-plus operation, but he
cautioned it cannot become one "de facto." He explained that
the NATO-EU cooperation problem is on the Turks' mind and
will continue to be as the planning progresses. Turkey has
no problem with the EU staff already at SHAPE working this
issue. But Turkey would be concerned if the EU were to
augment the staff with a Greek Cypriot for purposes of this
mission or if an EU LNO from Cyprus was assigned to a
potential regional HQ for this mission. The NATO security
agreement would also be an issue for the Turks vis-a-vis
planning.
2. (C) Coskun could not provide insight as to the Turkish
military's view on providing airlift assets. PolMilOff
followed up on this issue June 7 with COL Kasim Erdem,
TGS/J-5, but TGS has provided no substantive response as yet.
3. (C) Comment: Coskun's comments indicate that the GOT is
thinking ahead on this issue with an eye to being
constructive. We interpret his statement that "we are not
guarding the fence on this" as evidence that Turkey does not
want to see Darfur become a battleground for the NATO-EU
cooperation problem. Turkey's agreement to hold informal
NATO-EU meetings (albeit void of operational discussion) is
further evidence that the trend in Ankara is to try to lean
forward, though within the constraints of the Cyprus problem
(ref b).
4. (C) Comment, cont.: As for Turkey providing airlift, TGS
has also received a special plea from DSACEUR for Turkish
helos to remain in Afghanistan for the September elections
and is also occupied with the logistics of bringing their
troops and materiel home after ISAF VII ends in August. Our
sense is that the Foreign Ministry wants this to happen but
we do not know if it can sway the military. End comment.
5. (U) Khartoum minimize considered.
MOORE
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04