In mid-July, President Erdogan pointed his finger at the CIA,
accusing US intelligence of having supported a failed coup directed
against his government. Turkish officials pointed to a deterioration of
US-Turkey relations following Washington’s refusal to extradite
Fethullah Gülen, the alleged architect of the failed coup.
Erdogan’s Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag was categorical:
“If the US does not deliver (Gulen), they will sacrifice relations with Turkey for the sake of a terrorist”
Public opinion was led to believe that relations with the US
had not only deteriorated, but that Erdogan had vowed to restore “an
axis of friendship” with Moscow, including “cooperation in the defence
sector”. This was a hoax. Turkey’s Invasion of Syria
The implementation of the Turkish invasion required routine
consultations with the US and NATO, coordination of military logistics,
intelligence, communications systems, coordination of ground and air
operations, etc. To be effectively carried out these military endeavors
required a cohesive and “friendly” US-Turkey relationship.
We are not dealing with a piecemeal military initiative. Turkey’s Operation Euphrates Shield could not have taken place without the active support of the Pentagon, which ultimately calls the shots in the war on Syria.
The likely scenario is that from mid July to mid-August US, NATO and
Turkish officials were actively involved in planning the next stage of
the war on Syria: an (illegal) invasion led by Turkish ground-forces,
backed by the US and NATO.
the Turkish-led offensive in the northern Aleppo Governorate, showing
the ongoing developments in west of Euphrates River. Source Wikipedia
The Failed Coup Sets the Stage for a Ground Invasion
1. Massive purges within the armed forces
and government were implemented in the immediate wake of the July coup.
They had been planned well in advance. ”Arrested immediately were 2,839 army personnel with 2,745 Judges and Prosecutors ordered detained… In under a week 60,000 people had been fired or detained and 2,300 institutions closed” … “ (See Felicity Arbuthnot, Global Research, August 2, 2016)
2.The coup was intended
to fail. Erdogan had advanced knowledge of the coup and so did
Washington. There was no conspiracy directed by the CIA against Erdogan.
Quite the opposite, the failed coup was in all likelihood engineered by
the CIA in liaison with Erdogan. It was intended to consolidate and
reinforce the Erdogan regime as well as rally the Turkish people behind
their president and his military agenda “in the name of democracy”.
3. The purges within the Armed Forces
were intended to get rid of members of the military hierarchy who were
opposed to an invasion of Syria. Did the CIA assist Erdogan in
establishing the lists of military officers, judges and senior
government officials to be arrested or fired? The Turkish media was also
targeted, many of which were closed down.
4. Erdogan used the July 15 coup to
accuse Washington of supporting the Gulen movement while seeking a fake
rapprochement with Moscow. He flew to St Petersburg on August 9, for a
behind closed doors meeting with President Putin. In all likelihood, the
scenario of a rift between Ankara and Washington coupled with the “my
friend Putin” narrative had been approved by the Obama administration.
It was part of a carefully designed intelligence ploy coupled with media
disinformation. President Erdogan, vowed according to Western media
reports: “to restore an ‘axis of friendship’ between Ankara and Moscow amid a growing rift between Turkey and the West.”
5. While “mending the fence” with Russia,
Turkey’s military and intelligence apparatus was involved in planning
the invasion of Northern Syria in liaison with Washington and NATO
headquarters in Brussels. The underlying objective is to ultimately confront and weaken Syria’s military allies: Russia, Iran and Hezbollah.
In St Petersburg in the immediate wake of the July 15 failed coup, Erdogan thanked his “dear friend” Vladimir Putin.
“The fact Mr Putin called me the next day after the coup
attempt was a very strong psychological factor,” he said at a joint
press conference. “The axis of friendship between Moscow and Ankara
will be restored,” he said. Telegraph, August 7, 2016
Did Putin know that the failed coup, covertly supported by the CIA, was meant to fail? One suspects that Russian intelligence was aware of the ploy and was also informed regarding Turkey’s invasion plans:
“Your visit today, despite a very difficult situation
regarding domestic politics, indicates that we all want to restart
dialogue and restore relations between Russia and Turkey,” Mr Putin said
as the pair met in the city’s Constantine Palace.
… Mr Putin on Tuesday said Russia would “step by step” lift
sanctions, … Mr Erdogan in turn promised to back major Russian energy
projects in Turkey, including the construction of the country’s first
nuclear power station and a gas pipeline to Europe.
He also said the two countries would step up “cooperation in the defence sector,” but did not elaborate.
The Putin-Erdogan Saint Petersburg meeting was interpreted by the
media as a rapprochement with Moscow in response to the alleged
involvement of the CIA in the failed coup.
According to the Washington Post, an improvised about-turn in US-NATO-Turkey relations had occurred despite Erdogan’s “friendly” encounter with Putin:
NATO went out of its way Wednesday to insist that Turkey — whose
president this week visited Moscow and promised a new level of
cooperation with the man he repeatedly called his “dear friend,” Russian President Vladimir Putin — remains a “valued ally” whose alliance membership “is not in question.”
In a statement posted on its website, NATO said it was responding to
“speculative press reports regarding NATO’s stance regarding the failed
coup in Turkey and Turkey’s NATO membership.”
A nonsensical report. In actuality, the Pentagon, NATO, the Turkish
High Command and Israel are in permanent liaison. Israel is a de facto
member of NATO, it has a comprehensive bilateral military and
intelligence relationship with Turkey.
With the invasion of the border area of Northern Syria and the
influx of Turkish tanks and armoured vehicles, the Turkey-Russia
relationship is in crisis. And that is the ultimate objective of US
Russian forces are acting on behalf of their Syrian ally.
How will the Kremlin and Russia’s High Command respond to what constitutes a US-Turkey-NATO ground invasion of Syria?
How will they confront Turkish and allied forces? One assumes that Russia will avoid direct military confrontation.
After the US, Turkey is NATO’s heavy weight.
Sofar the Turkish op is limited to a small border territory.
Nonetheless it constitutes and important landmark in the evolution of
the Syria war: invasion of a sovereign country in derogation of
international law. Washington’s endgame remains “regime change” in
Is the military initiative a preamble for a larger military
undertaking on the part of Turkey supported by US-NATO? In many regards,
Turkey is acting as a US proxy:
Turkey’s incursion was backed by US air-cover, drones,
and embedded special forces per the WSJ. These were there largely to
prevent Russia and Syria from even thinking about taking action against
the invading forces.
Turkey is moving into Syria not just with its own military, but with
thousands of “rebel opposition groups” including US-backed FSA brigades
allied with AlQaeda/Nusra/Sham and the child head-chopping al-Zinki who
are reported to form the vanguard. Syrian territory is outright
being turned over to them by the Turkish military, simply exchanging
control from one group of terrorist jihadis (ISIS) to others who are more media acceptable and more direct proxies of the Erdogan regime, the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
That said, ISIS has not resisted the Turkish advance at all – simply “melting away” (or exchanging one set of uniforms for another?). (Moon of Alabama
Do the SAA Syrian forces have the military capabilities of
confronting Turkish ground forces without Russian and Iranian support?
How will Tehran react to the influx of Turkish forces? Will it come to
the rescue of its Syrian ally?
An “incident” could be used as a pretext to justify a broader
NATO-led war. Article 5 of the Washington Treaty (NATO’s founding
document) states under the doctrine of “collective security” that an
attack against one member state of the Atlantic Alliance (e.g. Turkey)
is an attack against all members states of the Atlantic Alliance.
Dangerous crossroads. With the incursion of Turkish ground forces,
military confrontation with Syria’s allies, namely Iran and Russia, is a
distinct possibility which could lead to a process of escalation
beyond Syria’s borders. The Erdogan-Jo Biden Meeting
From Washington’s perspective, this ground invasion sets the stage
for a possible annexation of part of Northern Syria by Turkey. It also
opens the door for the deployment of US-NATO ground force operations
directed against central and southern Syria.
Erdogan met up with Vice President Biden on August 23, following the
influx of Turkish tanks into Northern Syria. The invasion is carefully
coordinated with the US which provided extensive air force protection.
There is no rift between Ankara and Washington, quite the opposite:
It [is] difficult to believe that Turkey truly suspected
the US of an attempted decapitation of the nation’s senior leadership in
a violent, abortive coup just last month, only to be conducting joint
operations with the US inside Syria with US military forces still based
within Turkish territory.
What is much more likely is that the coup was staged to feign a
US-Turkish fallout, draw in Russia and allow Turkey to make sweeping
purges of any elements within the Turkish armed forces that might oppose
a cross-border foray into Syria, a foray that is now unfolding. (See The New Atlas, Global Research, August 24, 2016)
Media reports convey the illusion that the Biden-Erdogan meetings
were called to discuss the extradition of the alleged architect of the
failed coup Gulen. This was a smokescreen. Jo Biden who had also met
Erdogan back in January, gave the green-light on behalf of Washington
for a joint US-Turkey-NATO military incursion into Syria. The Kurdish Question
The invasion is not directed against Daesh (ISIS) which is protected
by Ankara, it is geared towards fighting SAA forces as well as Kurdish
YPG forces, which are “officially” supported by the US. The US supported
ISIS-Daesh and Al Qaeda affiliated rebels are working hand in give with
the Turkish invaders.
The invasion is also part of a longstanding project by Turkey of creating a “safe-haven” within Northern Syria (see map above) which can be used to extend US-NATO-Turkey military operations Southwards into Syria’s heartland.
Washington has warned its Kurdish allies not to confront Turkish forces:
Biden said the Kurds, who Turkey claims intend to
establish a separate state along a border corridor in conjunction with
Turkey’s own Kurdish population, “cannot, will not, and under no
circumstances will get American support if they do not keep” what he
said was a commitment to return to the east.
Washington will no doubt eventually clash with Ankara with regard to
Turkey’s project of territorial expansion in Northern Syria.
Washington’s longstanding objective is to create a Kurdish State in
Northern Syria, within the framework of a territorial breakup of both
Syria and Iraq. (see US National War Academy map below). In a bitter
irony, this “New Middle East” project also consists in annexing part of
Turkey to the proposed Kurdish State. In other words, Turkey’s New
Ottoman objective of territorial expansion encroaches upon Washington’s
design to fragment Iraq, Syria, Iran as well as Turkey. In other
words, America’s ultimate imperial design is to weaken Turkey as a
The Pentagon has defined a military roadmap: “The road to Tehran goes
through Damascus.” The invasion of Northern Syria creates conditions
for a broader war.
Moreover, on the US agenda is a longstanding objective, namely to
wage war on Iran. In this regard, US military strategy largely consists
in creating conditions for America’s staunchest allies (Turkey, Saudi
Arabia, Israel) to confront Iran, and act indirectly on behalf of US
interests. i.e. “do the job for us”. MAP OF THE NEW MIDDLE EAST
following map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was
published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired
colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright
Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006).
the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used
in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military
officers. This map, as well as other similar maps, has most probably
been used at the National War Academy as well as in military planning
The failed coup was indeed supported by the CIA, but the failure was
coordinated with President Erdogan. It was an intelligence op which was
meant to fail and mislead public opinion.
Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole
responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on
Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect
statement in this article.
ROLAND SAN JUAN was a researcher, management consultant, inventor, a part time radio broadcaster and a publishing director. He died last November 25, 2008 after suffering a stroke. His staff will continue his unfinished work to inform the world of the untold truths. Please read Erick San Juan's articles at: ericksanjuan.blogspot.com This blog is dedicated to the late Max Soliven, a FILIPINO PATRIOT.
DISCLAIMER - We do not own or claim any rights to the articles presented in this blog. They are for information and reference only for whatever it's worth. They are copyrighted to their rightful owners.
Please listen in to Erick San Juan's daily radio program which is aired through DWSS 1494khz AM @ 5:30pm, Mondays through Fridays, R.P. time, with broadcast title, “WHISTLEBLOWER” the broadcast tackle current issues, breaking news, commentaries and analyses of various events of political and social significance.