Hans-Lukas Kieser, Historisches Seminar der Universität Zürich, Kolloquium Wintersemester 2003/04: "Die USA und der Nahe Osten im 20. Jahrhundert"

 

"Valuable assets for US defence"


We must recognise the very substantial investment that the United States has made in the Turkish armed forces, aggregating $8.8 billion between 1946 and 1987. Since 1982 the United States through its Military Assistance Program, Economic Support Fund, and International Military Educational Training Program, has allocated annually to Turkey from $600 to $800 million, averaging $700 million. During the same period Greece has received from $300 to $600 million annually; Spain, $160 to $400 million; and Portugal $100 to $200 million. The United States still maintains rights in six military bases in Turkey: Sinop on the Black Sea, Incirlik, Umurtalik and Iskendrun in South Central Turkey, Beelbasi near Ankara and Diyarbakir in eastern Turkey. These are valuable assets for US defence, as well as for the defence of Turkey and NATO. (S. 173)

Another problem that involves both American public opinion and congressional action ist the continuing effort by persons of Armenian descent to redress incidents that occurred during World War I between Turks and the Turkish-Armenian minority. Although greatly to be regretted, it must be remembered that many of these events involved Armenians accused of collaboration with the Soviets, with whom Turkey was at war, when Turkey was under the Sultan. The Armenians were at that time being encouraged by the Soviets […] to set up an independent state. (S. 167 f.; historische Ignoranz aus dem Mund des ehemaligen US-Botschafters in der Türkei McGhee
!)

Americans, I believe, are fortunate that we, as a nation, have developed such close ties with Turkey, in light of the sort of country, Turkey is and where it is located. If we are to preserve these ties, we must be respectful of Turkey's claims on our partnership. We must place Turkey high on the priority list of nations we are willing to assist. We must contest efforts to relate through some mechanistic formula the aid we give to Turkey to what we give to Greece. We must restrain the Armenian-American groups that seek to revive age-old issues at the expense of current relations with the Turks. We must seek restraint for those who would leave Turkey to bear the full brunt of a Gramm-Rudman-type aid reduction while Israel and Egypt continue to receive almost half of all US foreign aid.
Our attitude toward Turkey should not be viewed as altruism, gratitude for past favours, or sympathy because Turkey has lagged in its economic development. It should be based on the role Turkey has played in the past in the world power game - and the role it can play in the future. The Turks are a resolute people willing to fight for their freedom; Turkey lies athwart Soviet access to the world's greatest repository of oil and strategic territory. We must be sure it remains the common interest of Turkey and the United States to maintain Turkey's role. (S. 180)

McGhee, George C., The US-Turkish-NATO Middle East connection: how the Truman doctrine and Turkey's NATO entry contained the Soviets, London: The Macmillan Press, 1990.
 

© 1998-2003 webmaster@hist.net
15.10.2003