Turkey makes every effort for liberation of Azerbaijan’s occupied territories

[atatwolf]

Actually it is Iran who sticks his nose in every country in the mid east and doing pan-Iranism. Turkey and Azerbaijan will have to answer with a similar weapon as retaliation.

Unfortunately unlike Turkey, Iran doesn't have a strong back..

Turkey Claims Iran Providing Logistical Support for PKK
That Turkey and Iran are engaged in a heated rivalry for influence in every corner of the Middle East is obvious. This has been going on for centuries, starting in ancient Persia and the geopolitical heartland of ancient Greece, today’s Turkish Aegean region.

To this geopolitical struggle was added a new dimension of rivalry between a Sunni and a Shiite power centers, induced by 15th-century Ottoman-Safavid wrangling. The irony was that this new rivalry was between two Turkish dynasties. In terms of ethnicity, the Safavids who ruled Iran could well be considered more Turk than the Ottoman dynasties, who, for political alliances, married into Christian monarchies and Byzantine remants.

The Turkish characteristics of two neighboring dynasties could not change the imperatives of geopolitics. It was the Safavids who developed Shiism in Iran, at the time majority Sunni. It was during the reign of the Safavids that Shiism became the official state religion of Iran. Since then, Iran has taken its place on the regional and international stage as the hub of Shiite power.

In the era of Qajars, another Turkish dynasty that replaced the Safavids, the Turkey-Iran rivalry continued with instruments of war. In the Ottoman-Iranian wars, today’s Iraq, especially Baghdad, frequently changed hands until 1639, when the struggle ended with the Qasr-i Shirin Accord, which drew today’s Iran-Iraq and Iran-Turkey borders. For 400 years, apart from some modifications, those borders did not change and spawned no irredentist demands from Turkey and Iran.

In this context, Qasr-i Shirin has been an indicator of how deep Turkish-Iranian relations were. These two geopolitical areas, no matter what kind of regimes governed them, recognized each other as experienced and established states and adhered to a code of conduct that restrained their competition for influence and power and prevented the use of force — so much so that, when there is tension between the US and Iran and Turkey is criticized for taking a more independent position vis-à-vis Iran, Turkish officials ironically remind the Americans that Qasr-i Shirin demarcated that unchanging border between Iran and Turkey, dating back to 150 years before the USA’s establishment.

For these reasons, Turkey and Iran, even in periods of escalating rivalry and regional contest for influence, have been careful in the language they have used with each other.

But in recent times, an erosion has been detected in this code of conduct. Iranian officials have been incessantly criticizing Turkey for its position on Syria. Both the language and the tone of Iranian criticism became strong following the decision of NATO to deploy Patriot missiles in Turkey. Iranian chief of Staff General Firuzabadi went as far as warning that the Patriots cold cause a third world war. Prime Minister Erdogan said he did not accept Firuzabadi as an interlocutor.

NATO might have decided to deploy the Patriots along the Turkish-Syria border as part of its future plans for Iran. Iran may well be justified in its questioning of NATO’s intentions. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that the finely tuned relationship between Turkey and Iran is losing its shape, battered by polemics and uncontrolled rhetoric. For the future of the region, this signals a major risk and danger potential.

As we are busy with the approaching end of the year, the latest such deviation from customary restraint was the statement of the Turkish Minister of Interior Idris Naim Sahin to daily Zaman and Aksiyon magazine when he openly spoke of an Iran-Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) linkage. Zaman headlined on Dec. 24 the minister’s statement under “Logistics support to PKK from Iran."

Minister Sahin said, “The terror organization is using Iran for accommodation, transit, training, medical care, recruiting, financing and propaganda. Moreover, some weapon transfers are conducted from there. Iran is not paying much attention to security measures in border regions.”

Turkish intelligence services are aware that Iran is in touch with the PKK, which has its command center in the Kandil Mountains, half of which are in Iranian territory. We know that their relations have developed even more since the March 2011 eruption of the Syrian crisis and that a yet-unlabeled Iran-Syria-PKK cooperation structure now exists. Turkish decision-makers, led by Erdogan, are aware of this. We can even add Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose relations with Turkey have deteriorated sharply, to this network. After rumors that Maliki recently met with PKK officials in Baghdad last week, Salih Muslim, the leader of the Syrian Kurdish Democratic Union Party (identified as the extension of the PKK and is certainly most dominant Syrian Kurdish organization), was received in Baghdad by Maliki.

In an era when ad hoc alliances and coalitions are being formed, Iran perceives a USA-Sunni axis supported by Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Tehran’s logistical support to the PKK is not hard to understand, and is well known by Turkish officials.

But to hear this loud and clear from a senior official, Minister of Interior Idris Naim Sahin, and having it banner-headlined in Zaman is a new, unusual development.

What makes it even more interesting is the personality of Idris Naim Sahin. He is a name identified as a “fascism proponent” with statements and utterances that shock the country’s liberal-democrat public opinion. More so, he is seen as one of the hawkish spokesmen of the government and the state on the Kurdish issue.

There is wing in the state and government that is inclined to negotiate with the PKK. If that succeeds, the PKK card will be taken away from Iran and the Syrian regime. But the hawkish line championed by Idris Naim Sahin advocates a policy of suppression and elimination against the PKK and its legal extension, the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP).

This policy is implemented with waves of arrests known as “KCK operations” to sever the links between the PKK and the BDP. About 10,000 BDP members have been arrested on charges of belonging to KCK, which is accused of being the PKK’s “parallel state structure.”

We are living through a period when domestic and foreign policies in the region all are muddled and unfathomable from outside.

Turkey is no exception. If Idris Naim Sahin’s latest remarks are a harbinger of future Turkey-Iran relations, then 2013 is prone to great dangers and risks for the Qasr-i Shirin heritage.


Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...n-turkey-shiite-sunni-pkk.html##ixzz2yhP1T4sl

 

[F117]

How can Turkey help the Banana Republic of Azerbaijan, if they don't share a border?

 

[Sam1980]

I will tell you a difference, I don't go around and spread propaganda at every corner of the internet like they do. And I definetly don't suffer from inferiority complex like they do, I don't make up stuff about other peoples, nations. Neither am I interested in it. And my way of argument & discussion does not revolve around being two-faced hypocrat.

This forum is for us to discuss our interests without really insulting one another, we shouldn't really lose our temper, it will only makes us agitated and angry for the rest of the day.

 

[olcayto]

How can Turkey help the Banana Republic of Azerbaijan, if they don't share a border?

Think again.

 

[ResurgentIran]

I think pan-anything (including pan-persianism) is outdated and doesnt belong in this century.
If you want Iranian Azarbaijan you would have to come and pry it from our grip, because we are not giving up an inch of our country.
There are no meaningful separatist group or ethnic conflicts in Iran anyway.

 

[atatwolf]

How can Turkey help the Banana Republic of Azerbaijan, if they don't share a border?

Make a land connection with Azerbaijan to stop Iran from its aggresive policies?

Plus Turkey has at the moment connection with Nakhchivan. I guess it is time to take some geography lessons.

I think pan-anything (including pan-persianism) is outdated and doesnt belong in this century.
If you want Iranian Azarbaijan you would have to come and pry it from our grip, because we are not giving up an inch of our country.
There are no meaningful separatist group or ethnic conflicts in Iran anyway.

It is in the hands of Azeri's...

 

[ASQ-1918]

I think pan-anything (including pan-persianism) is outdated and doesnt belong in this century.
If you want Iranian Azarbaijan you would have to come and pry it from our grip, because we are not giving up an inch of our country.
Btw Azerbaijanis flock to Iran en masse for food and medical tourism, because conditions are even worse in that corrupt Aliyev regime than it is in Iran (even put under sanctions).

Are you Surenas by any chance? You are still very happy about mentioning something that doesn't exist in reality. I have explained it already here, that people from border areas, like Astara, go to Iran, since the value of Manat is much higher than Iran's currency, and hence more purchasing power with Manat, and hence much cheaper. I'm pretty sure its done in some European border areas as well.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

Lets not twist facts, ok? When the Safavid Empire was actually formed, it was done so by Turks, and Ismail was a Turk and spoke Azerbaijani Turkish as his native language (which was also the language of his other side, the Aq-Qoyunlu), just like his father and grandfather (whom had already a big amount of followers from Turkic tribes). His maternal grandfather on the other hand was Uzun Hasan, the Aqqoyunlu king, who was also the uncle of his father.

And its not all about Ismail and his ancestors either, Safavid Empire was at the same time a Qizilbash Empire too. The Safaviyya order was always prominently followed by Turkic tribes. The court and military language of Safavids is a good clue, if your Pan-Farsist brains can see through it.

As for your lies about Iran's stance on Karabakh conflict, keep them to yourself. You Farsis just disgust me with your lies and just being so two-faced.

Their ideology which was the motor of their movement was formed by the Iranian safaviyya. Shah Ismael drunk in the skull of uzbeks.

The Uzbek ruler, Muhammad Shaybani, was caught and killed trying to escape the battle and the shah had his skull made into a jewelled drinking goblet

Although Ismail I did not only have Kurdish ancestry but also of various other ethnic groups,[23][24][25][26] the majority of scholars agree that his Empire was an Iranian one.[8][9][10][11][27]

Ismail I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We should also not forget the indo-european greek line of safavids, and uzun hassans daughter theodora was partly Bagratoini georgian. Only a few (Iranians) know that bagratoini georgians and Armenians have a noble Iranian background, orontid and possible Parthian and sassanid bloodline (3 pre-islamic Iranian dynasties). Bagratoini georgian bloodline goes back to Vakhtang I of Iberia (only one example of their background)

According to the Life of Vakhtang Gorgasali, the king was given at his birth an Iranian name Varazkhosrovtang, rendered in Georgian as Vakhtang.[6] The name may indeed be derived from Iranian *warx-tang (vahrka-tanū)—"wolf-bodied", a possible reflection of the wolf cult in ancient Georgia

Vakhtang is reported by the LVG to have succeeded at the age of 7 his father King Mihrdat (V). His mother, a Christianized Persian Sagdukht, assumed regency in Vakhtang's minority. Mihrdat was the son and successor of King Archil. The Georgian annals praise Mihrdat for his piety, but provide no details about his reign. He was married to Sagdukht, daughter of Barzabod, Mihranid prince of Gardman, and fathered Vakhtang, his successor.

The Mihranids were a Iranian family which ruled several regions of Caucasus from 330 to 821. They claimed to be of Sasanian Persian descent but were probably of Parthian origin.

According to the LVG, Vakhtang was survived by three sons. Dachi, Vakhtang’s eldest son by his first marriage to the Iranian princess Balendukht (who died at childbirth), succeeded him as king of Iberia and had to return to Iranian allegiance. Two younger sons by Vakhtang’s second marriage to the Roman lady Helena—Leon and Mihrdat—were enfeoffed of the southwestern Iberian provinces of Klarjeti and Javakheti in which Leon’s progeny—the Guaramids—traditionally followed pro-Roman orientation. Both these lines survived in Iberia into the 8th century, being succeeded by their energetic cousins of the Bagratid family

The main Armenian house went extinct by the 12th century, while the Georgian line, in its minor branch, continues to this day as the nominal Royal House of Georgia. The root of the names Bagrationi and Bagratuni, Bagrat-, derives from the Old Persian Bagadāta, "God-Given".

The Bagratids of Armenia are speculated to have been an offshoot of the Orontid Dynasty, Achaemenid satraps and, later, kings of Armenia (c 400 – c 200 BC).

Xenophon mentions an Armenian king named Tigranes in his Cyropaedia. He was an ally of Cyrus the Great with whom he hunted. Tigranes paid tribute to Astyages. His elder son was also named Tigranes.

The name Orontes is the Hellenized form of a masculine name of Iranian origin;Երուանդ Eruand in Old Armenian. The name is only attested in Greek (Gr.:Ὀρόντης). Its Avestan connection is Auruuant (brave, hero) and Middle Persian Arwand (Modern Persian اروند Arvand)

So safavids had beside their ordinary Iranian bloodline also probably ancient Iranian bloodline without knowing it.

Further almost all the turkish dynasty were persianate (culture and language), so we should forget their Turkishness?
Vakhtang is reported by the LVG to have succeeded at the age of 7 his father King Mihrdat (V).

 

[ResurgentIran]

Are you Surenas by any chance? You are still very happy about mentioning something that doesn't exist in reality. I have explained it already here, that people from border areas, like Astara, go to Iran, since the value of Manat is much higher than Iran's currency, and hence more purchasing power with Manat, and hence cheaper. I'm pretty sure its done in Europe as well.

Im not Surenas.
Its funny, I keep seeing several people accusing different users they dont agree with of being Surenas. lol

 

[F117]

Make a land connection with Azerbaijan to stop Iran from its aggresive policies?

That would draw the ire of Russia, who will keep the Caucasus free of Turkish incursions. We will see Crimea part 2, starring Armenia and Georgia as the lead actors.

Foundations of Geopolitics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is a popular book with the foreign policy elite in Russia:

• Azerbaijan could be "split up" or given to Iran.
• Armenia has a special role and will serve as a "strategic base" and it is necessary to create "the [subsidiary] axis Moscow-Erevan-Teheran"
• Georgia should be dismembered
• The book regards the Caucasus as a Russian territory, including "the eastern and northern shores of the Caspian

 

[-SINAN-]

I think pan-anything (including pan-persianism) is outdated and doesnt belong in this century.
If you want Iranian Azarbaijan you would have to come and pry it from our grip, because we are not giving up an inch of our country.
There are no meaningful separatist group or ethnic conflicts in Iran anyway.

We think other wise.

Check the poll. Poll: Turkey's possible future union

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

@Shapur Zol Aktaf

And if you are just going to twist the reality about Safavids, lets say Nadir Shah Afshar, who was responsible for more greater expansion than Safavids, and who actually saved you Farsis from being raped by your Afghan cousins. And then Qajars, whom regained Khorasan, South Azerbaijan etc...which the incompetent Zands could not.

Whatever you do, you cannot erase reality with Pan-Farsi lies.

Qajars opium womanizer dynasty were the biggest traitors in history of Iran and nader shah afshar almost commited a genocide in India like the armenian genocide. Take these barbars with you please.
Whenever Iran was ruled by wise Iranian like zand dynasty, the country did well.

 

[ASQ-1918]

Their ideology which was the motor of their movement was formed by the Iranian safaviyya. Shah Ismael drunk in the skull of uzbeks.

Ismail I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We should also not forget the indo-european greek line of safavids, and uzun hassans daughter theodora was partly Bagratoini georgian. Only a few (Iranians) know that bagratoini georgians and Armenians have a noble Iranian background, orontid and possible Parthian and sassanid bloodline (3 pre-islamic Iranian dynasties). Bagratoini georgian bloodline goes back to Vakhtang I of Iberia (only one example of their background)

So safavids had beside their ordinary Iranian bloodline also probably ancient Iranian bloodline without knowing it.

Further almost all the turkish dynasty were persianate (culture and language), so we should forget their Turkishness?
Vakhtang is reported by the LVG to have succeeded at the age of 7 his father King Mihrdat (V).

Safaviyya had no ethnic identity, are you that retarded? Like said, the Safaviyya order was always followed by Turks in majority, which does not match with your claim to begin with.

And? Do you realize that Safavid army that fought in battles were Qizilbash Turks? I can't stress enough how retarded you sound in every sentence of yours.

Vastly different examples. Turkic had never the status of Persian, which was basically the Latin of Muslim world, a lingua-franca and language of school, even up to late 19th century. That Safavids actually valued Turkic so much is pretty significant in that perspective, one shall not forget that Turkic was and is indeed only limited to its native speakers.

 

[olcayto]

That would draw the ire of Russia, who will keep the Caucasus free of Turkish incursions. We will see Crimea part 2, starring Armenia and Georgia as the lead actors.

Foundations of Geopolitics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is a popular book with the foreign policy elite in Russia:

Never seen a map in it's life and is know talking about geopolitics.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

Im not Surenas.
Its funny, I keep seeing several people accusing different users they dont agree with of being Surenas. lol

they accused me also of being Surenas haha