Whodunnit: The Truth Behind Turkey Downing A Russian Plane
Saeed Naqvi
Turkeman tribesmen, on the
Syrian side of the border with Turkey, calling themselves the Syrian Liberation
Army, are actually in harness to protect routes on which oil tankers have been
plying regularly from Syria to Turkey for the Western market. This smuggling
enterprise is controlled by Bilal Erdogan, son of Turkish President Tayyip
Erdogan. The whodunnit nature of the incident is explained by the extraordinary
pressure on the President’s office brought by this extra constitutional entity.
Eversince the Russians entered
the Syrian theatre as part of a broader understanding with the US, these
tankers and the mercenary soldiers protecting them have come under heavy Russian
fire.
Moscow would be justified in
being somewhat puzzled that neither the US nor NATO, with its vast intelligence
apparatus, spotted 90,000 barrels of oil being “clandestinely” transported over
the border. Profits from this enterprise finances groups which constitute the
ISIS.
It is universally acknowledged
that Turkey has been most enthusiastic and active in supporting anti Assad
militancy in Syria. When some of the groups patronized by Turkey, mostly
affiliated to the Muslim Brotherhood, mutated into the Islamic state, Turkey
tried its best to have this region of its operation, in Northern Syria,
declared a no-fly-zone.
The official Russian press
note quotes verbatim what Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told his Turkish
counterpart, Mevlut Cavusoglu on November 26: “by shooting down a Russian plane
on a counter-terrorist mission of the Russian Aerospace Force in Syria, and one
that did not violate Turkey’s air space, the Turkish government has in effect
sided with ISIS.”
Lavrov added “Turkey’s action
appear premeditated, planned and undertaken with a specific object.”
Even Washington has not come
to Turkey’s rescue. In the joint Press Conference with France’s Francois
Hollande, Presided made a perfunctory remark that every country has the right
to protect its borders and airspace. But on the specifics of the shooting down
of the Russian fighter jet, US officials maintained the Russian plane was in
the Turkish air space for “no more than 17 seconds” during which period “10
warnings” could not have been given to the Russian pilot as Turkey claims.
Even among Western countries
who recently forged an alliance against the ISIS there are skeptics who see Turkey
playing both sides of the street. There are serious suspicions that the
shooting down of the plane had been planned. As soon as the Russian pilot and
his navigator ejected from the jet in a mountainous, inhospitable terrain,
their parachutes were instantly targeted by machine guns which were clearly
expecting the shooting of the Russian plane in their area. This area was not in
Turkey. It was in Syria.
While the pilot, Sergey
Rumyantsev, was killed, the navigator is alive. He is being treated in Syria.
He has confirmed what would otherwise be speculative stories emanating from
Moscow.
There are other issues the US
and NATO must be confidentially sorting out with Russia. Written into the
understanding between Washington and Moscow was an obligation to give prior
notice of every aerial activity to the alliance partners. In this instance,
neither Washington nor NATO were informed of the airspace violation by Russia
and that Turkey proposed to take drastic action against the Russian aircraft.
Recently, an Ankara-Moscow
hotline was established to avert just the sort of mishap which have generated fears
of a wider conflict. A senior Turkish official turned the argument against the
Russians. “Russians are under global sanctions and their purchase of oil from
ISIS for delivery to the Syrian regime is in violation of these sanctions.”
The official has, in his
armoury, the transcript of the warnings issued to the erring Russian pilot. But
the transcript only records warning and no response and, by that token, is weak
testimony.
That Iraq and Syria are
overcrowded with divergent interests became clear in February when Iraq’s Army
shot down two British planes who were allegedly carrying weapons for the ISIS
in the Anbar province. The incident was never denied largely because Iraq Parliament’s
National Security and Defence Committee had photos of the planes that had been
shot down.
And now that Prime Minister
David Cameron is rearing to go into Syria with airstrikes (if only he can coax
a nod of approval from his Parliament) he is probably eager to reach out for
the piece of the Syrian pie he could not lay his hands on all these months.
An amusing sketch that
surfaces on the social networks at intervals shows Uncle Sam seated in an
ornate carriage. An, Arab, looking rather like the Saudi King, is in the
driver’s seat. He has a firm grip on reins strapped to four burly, hooded ISIS
militants. The message, consumed avidly in Iraq, is that ISIS was, at one stage
a Saudi-US asset. Some of this activity boomeranged on the US when an embarrassed
Defence Secretary Ashton Carter had to announce to the press that a $500
million training programme in Syria had been withdrawn after Syrian opposition
trained by the US had handed their weapons to militants and sought safe passage
to heaven knows where.
So far the Syrian-Iraqi
terrain has been the graveyard of many regional and Western reputations.
Russians must keep their fingers crossed. New Delhi will learn a great deal
more when Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister, Dmitry Rogozin meets Indian leaders
in the second week of December.
# # # #
Admire your sources. I hope you are training a successor who can gather info like you do.
ReplyDelete