IS OUR STATE DEPT CREATING WAR OBSTACLES?

Joel Mowbray has been a persistent thorn in the side of the our Arabist-leaning State Dept lately and has uncovered some disturbing activities behind the scenes of the Turkey negotiations:

"The leaks made Turkey look like a prostitute," complains one Turkish official. Part of this anger stems from the fact that the leaks claiming Turkey was still shaking down the U.S. for more money continued even after the economic issues had been agreed upon and taken off the table. While the source of leaks can never be known for certain, officials at both State and the Pentagon insist that the leaks were part of a coordinated campaign by State to strong-arm Turkey. If so, the tactic backfired.

But the leaks were only part of the problem. People familiar with the political scene in Turkey — as much as 90 percent of the public opposes war with Iraq — knew for months before Saturday that the vote in the parliament would be tight. In an effort to build more support among the Turkish military, the Pentagon wanted to send a delegation to Turkey in November. State refused. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage was adamant that the Pentagon not encroach on State's turf, and the military meeting was scuttled.

According to a Turkish official, one of the items that members of the parliament were angriest about was the exclusion of Turkish-backed individuals from the leadership of the Iraqi opposition...The move puzzled many in the Bush administration. "State warmly embraced the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution (backed by Tehran) and went out of its way to keep Saudi Arabia happy, but then they decided to screw our ally," complains a Defense Department official.

As far as the money goes, we needed to make a point to Turkey about our financial limits but we also really needed their help fast. So what should have been done to pressure them gently? We should have dealt with them like a sports team of the future would deal with a key superstar who fails to report to training camp. While you can win without them, or still use them if they report at the very last minute, you would rather not do either. So we should have increased our "final" aid offer by a few billion dollars as a gesture of good faith, but made the bonus only good for an immediate decision within 72 hours. Tell them up front that the offer will then shrink by a billion dollars a day for two weeks until it reaches a baseline minimum of a few billion dollars. Explain that if we decide to move on without them, we'll have to promote their Kurdish rival as a replacement. Tell them it's nothing personal, but that we're losing team preparedness each day they delay and we have no other choice.

Although it seems now they might belatedly approve the troops after their stock market crashed 12% Monday and then jumped 5% today on news of a second vote, we're offering them much more than they deserve at this point. They ought to look into streamlining their government bureaucracy when war is the issue.