Turkey Voices Reservations About Western Missile Defense

BELGRADE, Serbia (Oct. 19) -- Turkey is expressing reservations about a proposed missile defense shield aimed at protecting NATO members from attacks by rogue states such as Iran, posing a dilemma for Washington.

According to recent news reports, Ankara is worried that the missile shield is singling out Iran and Syria, neighboring countries with which Turkey maintains close bilateral ties on crucial issues such as trade, energy and security.

In August, AOL News reported that the U.S. is trying to convince either Bulgaria or Turkey to host an important X-band radar station that will detect incoming missiles. Neither country has agreed outright to host the radar station, but the issue is back on the table as the missile defense shield, until now a U.S. project, is set to become a joint NATO effort when the alliance holds an important meeting in Lisbon next month to decide its future direction.

NATO makes decisions through consensus with all 28 members of the alliance, so Turkey's reservations have the potential to frustrate the plans for missile defense, one of the most difficult-to-implement elements of Western defense.

"We do not perceive any threat from any neighbor countries, and we do not think our neighbors form a threat to NATO," Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said to reporters last week.

What Turkey appears to want to avoid is the NATO summit ending with an agreement to focus the missile defense shield against its eastern allies.

Turkey has been a member of NATO since 1952.

According to reports, the country has asked for clarifications on the technical details of the missile shield. The country wants to establish whether the missile shield will cover all of Turkey or just certain regions.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the U.S. was not pressuring Turkey over the shield. "I would say that we are not putting pressure on the Turks, but we are having continuing conversations with them as one of our allies," Gates said at an Oct. 14 news conference in Brussels.

Turkey's unique geopolitical position bordering both the European Union and eastern countries like Iran necessitates good relations with both. Yet Pentagon officials are hoping the country will not oppose the missile defense shield in Lisbon next month. "As we look at where the ballistic-missile threats can come from, Turkey seems to us to be very much along the front line," James Townsend, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense for European and NATO policy, told reporters in Washington recently.

A Turkish refusal to back the shield could significantly damage relations between the U.S. and Turkey. Top officials in both countries have said that ties remains strong, tempered by a long history as allies. Yet the relationship is undergoing a transformation as Turkey steers a more independent path than in the past. In recent months, the country has lashed out at Israel and voted against sanctions for Iran in the United Nations, in both cases going against the traditional line set forth by the U.S. Diplomatic sources in Istanbul say the U.S. government is reacting warily even as it attempts to keep Turkey close.

Turkish media have recently expressed criticism of the missile defense shield, saying it is aimed at protecting Israel, a country that has been increasingly vilified by Turkish politicians.

"Israel not only continues its efforts to undermine Turkish interests in Washington ... this arrogant attitude is now being supported by the U.S. administration and Europe, who yet expect Turkey to act as a shield for Israel," commentator Ergun Babahan wrote in a recent column for Today's Zaman.

Mehmet Ali Tugtan, a defense expert at Istanbul's Bilgi University, was skeptical about the ability of the U.S. to establish the long-sought missile shield.

"By turning this into a NATO project, the Obama administration secured the political support of its European allies, because the NATO framework gave the Europeans a say over the shield," he said. "In time, the United States will realize that with each concession she makes to others for their continued cooperation, the original project loses its actual purpose and burdens the U.S. with further obligations."