The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


When Turkey Goes Nuclear .....

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Postby pantheman » Fri Sep 26, 2008 6:22 pm

CopperLine wrote:No it does not 'all boil down to trust'. It boils down to evidence and verification. That's why international organisations have developed to inspect, seek evidence and verify compliance rather than pursue the Oracle strategy of reckless and baseless speculation.

Whilst absolute precision in assessments is probably impossible, it is equally impossible to hide a weapons programme.


So you agree that saddam had no WDM then?? Since you are so sure.

Therefore the Yanks did trick us after all, ouch, Milti will be after you now for spilling the beans on his buddies :lol: :lol:
User avatar
pantheman
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 1:21 pm

Postby Eurasia » Fri Sep 26, 2008 6:30 pm

I think every country should have nuclear power!!I figure if were going to suffer from fallout we might as well have our own to inflict on others....:)
User avatar
Eurasia
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:58 pm
Location: Cyprus

Postby Oracle » Fri Sep 26, 2008 11:23 pm

CopperLine wrote:No it does not 'all boil down to trust'. It boils down to evidence and verification. That's why international organisations have developed to inspect, seek evidence and verify compliance rather than pursue the Oracle strategy of reckless and baseless speculation.

Whilst absolute precision in assessments is probably impossible, it is equally impossible to hide a weapons programme.


.... Too quick to criticise, you proved my point! It is precisely because evidence and verifications are so hard to come by that the element of "trust" comes into play and was a direct interjection to this:

Centre for Non Proliferation Studies wrote:
Precise assessment of a state's capabilities is difficult because most weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs remain secret and cannot be verified independently.


But there are many who are suspicious of Turkey's intentions, but please research them for yourself, I just offer the odd pointer, I do not have to provide an exhaustive list for you to nit-pick for no reason other than to predictably and habitually contradict me.

Here it is Turkey not trusting Iran (and Fitzpatrick not "trusting" Turkey) ....

Concern over Middle East nuclear plans

By Paul Reynolds

BBC News

Plans announced recently by Egypt and Turkey that they hope to build nuclear power plants are raising a ripple of concern about the long-term prospect of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

"It is easy to exaggerate and it is true that these countries have a right to seek all sources of energy but it is indisputable that there is also a strategic element to this," said Mark Fitzpatrick, senior fellow in non-proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.

One of the dangers of Iran going nuclear has always been that it might provoke others. So when you see the development of nuclear power elsewhere in the region, it does raise concerns

Mark Fitzpatrick

"Having a nuclear infrastructure is the step which a country needs to accomplish if it decides to embark on the path of nuclear weapons. Pakistan took that route," he said.

According to this theory, Egypt and Turkey are worried at the failure of the United Nations to stop Iran from enriching uranium. They consider they might be left behind if Iran, despite its denials, does one day develop as a nuclear armed power.

They are therefore taking preliminary steps to protect themselves from a security point of view as well as an energy one.

"One of the dangers of Iran going nuclear has always been that it might provoke others. So when you see the development of nuclear power elsewhere in the region, it does raise concerns," said Mark Fitzpatrick
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby Oracle » Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:07 am

Pushed by CopperLine, I found this interesting article which I feel compelled to share ....

The Turkish-Pakistani Connection

Turkey has long been known as a vital transit and assembly point for contraband nuclear materials. It has been aiding the nuclear aspirations of Pakistan, in particular, since a military coup in 1980. A report from back in 2000 recalled that:

"[T]urkey has already been implicated in nuclear arms aid to Pakistan. An earlier attempt to build an Argentinean-designed reactor was likely aimed at plutonium production for nuclear weapons. Evidence of nuclear smuggling based in Turkey, and Turkey's push for its own nuclear fuel capability and indigenous reactor design, all pointed to possible nuclear weapons development. The support of prominent Turkish citizens for nuclear weapons development has leant credence to this evidence."

Over the past 20 years, various Turkish and Pakistani governments, as well as sections of the military, have looked kindly on the idea of creating Islamic nuclear states. The countries were specifically linked in the A.Q. Khan network; this July 2004 summary gives detailed information:

"[W]orkshops in Turkey made the centrifuge motor and frequency converters used to drive the motor and spin the rotor to high speeds. These workshops imported subcomponents from Europe and elsewhere, and they assembled these centrifuge items in Turkey. Under false end-user certificates, these components were shipped to Dubai for repackaging and shipment to Libya."

Today, it is not known whether Turkey possesses nuclear weapons. But remember, the crucial part of the above-cited 2000 report is:

"[E]vidence of nuclear smuggling based in Turkey, and Turkey's push for its own nuclear fuel capability and indigenous reactor design, all pointed to possible nuclear weapons development. The support of prominent Turkish citizens for nuclear weapons development has leant credence to this evidence."

Total trafficking levels are hard to adduce, though it's clear that more supplies get through than are caught. From 1993-1999 alone, there were 18 high-profile incidents of nuclear trafficking involving Turkey – the sort of cases that Valerie Plame's unit sought to investigate. As this report details, "these cases include nuclear material seized in Turkey, nuclear material interdicted en route to Turkey, and seizure of nuclear material smuggled by Turkish nationals." In most of the cases, the nuclear materials originated in unstable former Soviet states such as Georgia, Romania, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Russia itself. Among the destination states, Libya and Iran jump out. In addition to Turks, detained smugglers included nationals of Azerbaijan, Russia, Georgia, Romania, as well as a Kazakh army colonel and suspected Iranian secret service agents.

A couple of years later, on Sept. 10, 2001, the N.Y. Times reported that "in the last eight years, there have been 104 attempts to smuggle nuclear material into Turkey, according to an internal report by the Turkish Atomic Energy Authority."

An Unpredictable Future

As Seymour Hersh related in his 1993 article, Pakistani leaders were smart enough to know that the U.S. was just using them for their proximity to Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation. They knew that when the Russians withdrew, the U.S. would have no further need for them – and would be less enthusiastic about letting the country go nuclear. However, by the time the Soviets pulled out, the damage had long been done. After all, A.Q. Khan had been boasting since the mid-1980s that his country had the bomb.

An even more frightening prospect is a nuclear Turkey. The country has been militarily subsidized even more than Pakistan; mass military aid and technology transfer were justified first of all by Turkey's status as a key Cold War ally and thereafter as a bulwark of secular Islam, holding the wall against Syria, Iran, and Iraq.

However, the very same American leaders who have been arming Turkey and allowing, in some cases even profiting from, nuclear smuggling there have also ruined the delicate balance of regional power with the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and brought the world far closer to nuclear confrontations.

In the former case, they put huge strain on the "pro-Western" Musharraf government, strengthening the hand of fundamentalist Islamists in both the mosque and in the armed forces. Musharraf has survived multiple assassination attempts, but there is no guarantee that he will enjoy lucky escapes forever. If he goes, what then? Any coup by a populist, fundamentalist-based leader would instantly put both Pakistan and India on high alert, taking us back to previous near-apocalyptic nuclear showdowns. Mired in numerous other bloody commitments of its own making, there's no certainty that the U.S. could finesse the situation as it did in 1990.

While Turkey is much less likely to fall victim to an Islamist coup, preserved as it is by a strongly secular military, it could easily grow more isolationist. Major changes have occurred since the invasion of Iraq that have manifested themselves in a demoted role for Turkey in U.S. foreign policy considerations, a shifting relationship between it and Europe, a return to Islamic roots, and the revival of armed Kurdish insurrectionists in the southeast.

With 2002's war planning, the neocons decided that it was not enough to merely keep Turkey on as the dependable bulwark of the West's hinterland; instead, they chose to take the bull by the horns and seize the whole neighborhood for themselves. After the Iraq invasion gave the U.S. troops a huge and probably permanent regional military presence and the capabilities to easily strike Iran and Syria, Turkey's strategic importance has been downgraded. At the same time, the revival of Kurdish terrorism in Turkey, inspired by the "liberation" next door in Iraq, has left many Turks feeling angry and apprehensive that the U.S. no longer has its best interests in mind. They also sympathize on religious grounds with fellow Muslims who are being injured and killed every day in Iraq.

The way Turkey's other external relationships are handled in the coming months will also play a role in deciding the direction of future trends. The European Union recently began candidacy negotiations with Turkey, something about which large sections of the European public have deep misgivings. It's hard to see how they will become more eager to welcome Turkey aboard after having seen the rioting of Muslim immigrants that swept France and neighboring countries in recent weeks.

The issue of the EU is controversial not only in Europe, however; nationalist and religious-minded Turks do not want to make the sometimes humiliating concessions and "reforms" Brussels is requesting of them. That the Iraq war added to the volatility of the Middle East, rather than to its stabilization, goes without saying. But Turkey's sudden drop in the estimation of U.S. policy planners and its arm's-length treatment from the EU can only increase feelings of frustration and alienation among the general populace, strengthening the religious-based parties and go-it-alone nationalist sentiment alike.

Proud Turkey has always wanted to be seen as an important country. Were it to declare itself a nuclear one, it would become, for a time at least, the most important country in the world. The entire balance of power in Europe and the Middle East would be radically altered overnight, and the overall side results would not at all be positive for Turkey or anyone else – except of course for those cashing in on illicit nuclear sales. Nevertheless, the country is probably technologically capable by now. A new question that has thus arisen, as articulated recently by Turkish scholar Mehmet Kalyoncu on Balkanalysis.com, is the following: "If the U.S. and the EU do not approve of Turkey having nuclear weapons, what do they have to offer Turkey instead?"

This is a startling question that no one hopes will be asked. If it is, it certainly won't come as a surprise to those neocons of long experience who have gotten rich by helping Pakistan (and perhaps soon Turkey) realize nuclear ambitions – making the world a safer place for all of us in the process.


Source: antiwar
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby Oracle » Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:10 am

dp

Why does this keep happening at the moment :?
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby CopperLine » Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:32 am

The Turkish-Pakistani Connection

Turkey has long been known as a vital transit and ass.....


Total and utter bollocks. Speculation from beginning to end. Fact : Turkey does not have a single nuclear power station. Fact : Turkey does not produce its own nuclear technology. Fact : Turkey does not have a nuclear weapons programme. Fact : Turkey has expressed no ambition to be a nuclear weapons power.

So Oracel I'm sure you could dig up dozens if not hundreds of articles from the internet speculating on all sorts of things, including nuclear smuggling, but none of it amounts to a weapons programme and none of it supports your initial speculation of Turkey having an ulterior motive.

No, evidence and verification is not hard to come by. There is a sophisticated and permanent system of surveillance on nuclear materials market, not least the 'black market', and a comprehensive system of inspections. Sure sometimes precise information is difficult to verify, but as I said before, you cannot hide a weapons programme.

Pantheman Iraq never had so-called WMD. Inspection after inspection confirmed this. Bush and Blair simply lied to the world at large.
User avatar
CopperLine
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:04 pm

Postby Get Real! » Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:44 am

Did you people know that Japan is the world’s ONLY nuclear weapons-grade products exporter such as yellow cake? Even the US buys from them, and for the right price and arrangements I doubt Japan could care less which country buys them.
User avatar
Get Real!
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 48333
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: Nicosia

Postby Oracle » Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:45 am

CopperLine wrote:No, evidence and verification is not hard to come by.


If you think you know better than the Centre for Non-Proliferation Studies .... :roll:

Centre for Non Proliferation Studies wrote:
Precise assessment of a state's capabilities is difficult because most weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs remain secret and cannot be verified independently.
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby zan » Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:55 am

I think all nuclear power stations should be built in Greece and they should supply power to the world...They are the only responsible people jn the world...Lets have a POLL...I will vote for them any day.....Three cheers for Nuclear Greece!!!!!!! Who's with me :?:
User avatar
zan
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16213
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm

Postby CopperLine » Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:31 pm

[quote]This chart summarizes data available from public sources. Precise assessment of a state's capabilities is difficult because most weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs remain secret and cannot be verified independently. [/quote

Oracle uses her usual selective economy with words which alters the meaning from the original. The original is as above and comes from a footnote in a Monterey Institute report about ... Israel (not Turkey)... written in 1998 (not current) ... and says that it uses public sources and that is why it is difficult for the report writers to make a precise assessment. In other words if one uses public sources it is difficult to make a precise assessment. If one uses intelligence sources - and that's what the inspection and verification agencies do - then pretty accurate assessments can be made.

What is a precise assessment ? A precise assessment is one which will tell you the number of kilos and even grammes of useable material, where in the nuclear cycle various quantities are, what kind of processes techniques are used, how many warheads have been produced. But this level of precision is not needed to ascertain whether a weapons programme is up and running or about to be launched.

Anyway, there's no evidence of ulterior motives in Turkey not least because Turkey doesn't even have a civil nuclear programme.

[/i]
User avatar
CopperLine
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:04 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest