In the words of a Western diplomat, if Turkey were not located in this critical geography, it would not have had any importance for the US.
This is a realistic analysis that also dictates the relationship among the nations. That also explains why Turkish-US relations soured significantly when Parliament rejected a motion on March 1, 2003 -- soon before the US invasion of Iraq -- that would have opened Turkish soil to use by this NATO ally.
Despite rejecting the motion allowing US soldiers to enter Iraq via Turkey, which would have eased the US invasion by providing it a second front, Ankara later allowed the US and other coalition forces to use İncirlik Air Base in the south as a cargo hub for non-lethal goods as well as for strategic airlifts to Afghanistan. The nearby port of İskenderun has also become vital for US forces; the port is used to meet a number of needs, from stockpiling arms to procuring other goods required for a warring nation.
But the Turkish motion led to irreparable damage among the two allies, rightly or wrongly, since it marked a serious loss of confidence in particular on the part of Washington towards both Ankara's political leadership as well as towards the Turkish military, with which it has enjoyed privileged relations for decades.
The US's supply of real-time intelligence to Turkey since November 2007, which has enabled the Turkish military to accurately pinpoint the bases of outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) terrorists in northern Iraq, preventing serious collateral damage, helped restore the damage inflicted on the bilateral relations.
Now that US President Barack Obama has made his final decision and announced on Feb. 27 that the US would withdraw most of its military forces from Iraq by mid-2010, the routes the US will use to evacuate its forces from the country are on the agenda.
There are approximately 142,000 US troops in Iraq, according to the US Defense Department.
A residual force of between 35,000 and 50,000 US troops will remain in Iraq into 2011 with the primary mission of training, equipping and advising Iraqi security forces; conducting targeted counterterrorism missions; and protecting US civilian and military efforts. The only thing that could alter the withdrawal timetable would be a new outbreak of insurgent violence.
As US exit routes have begun to be discussed, the Turkish side has denied reports that Turkey and the US have started informal talks about using Turkish soil for US troop withdrawal. Despite these denials, using Turkish territory, among other routes, for US troop withdrawal will be on the agenda sooner or later.
The Turkish attitude toward facilitating US withdrawal or making it more difficult will be another test of confidence for the bilateral relations, particularly at a time when Turkey needs President Obama to avoid uttering the word "genocide" during his April 24 commemoration speech in reference to the World War I events involving Armenians under Ottoman Turkish rule.
This Turkish concern may soften Turkish policy toward facilitating the exit of US troops from Iraq via Turkey.
Most US troop withdrawal is expected to take place via Kuwait and Jordan, i.e., through the Persian Gulf. Turkey stands as a supplementary, but also easier route, for pulling out US troops, depending on the location of US forces within Iraq.
Recalling Turkey's initial foot-dragging attitude in allowing the use of İncirlik by both the US and other coalition forces back in 2003, Ankara-based Western diplomats are not very optimistic this time, stressing the difficulty of doing business with Ankara.
Some Western diplomats also believe Turkey is not too vital in the US's troop withdrawal strategy.
But the Turkish attitude toward easing the US exit strategy or making it more difficult will test whether the two allies can trust each other.
Correction: In my column dated Feb. 26, titled "Command center in Arbil and tactical problems," the word "Turkish" is mistakenly written as "Kurdish" in paragraph 10, line 3. Thus, the correct version of the sentence should read: "Türk gave the speech in Kurdish though it was in violation of parliamentary bylaws as well as the Constitution, which bar speaking languages other than Turkish in Parliament in particular." I apologize to the readers for this mistake.
