Documents / FOIA release
This Central Intelligence Agency conference report, numbered RTT 95-10039 and dated October 1995, presents the proceedings of a conference held 30 September to 1 October 1993. The CIA's Geographic Resources Division sponsored the conference. In it, academic geographers, anthropologists and US Government officials examined ethnic conflict by region, covering Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, Asia and South Asia. The report also discusses what these conflicts mean for US policy. It does not deal with UFOs or unidentified aerial phenomena.
“Nevers”25 pages
Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268 The Turks probably would not heed a call from the West to stay out of the conflict because they are abso- lutely fed up with their so-called Western allies. Dur- ing my visits to 'I‘urkey in 1992 and 1993, anti- Westernism was apparent everywhere. The lack of support for the Turkish position on Cyprus is only a minor irritant as compared to Western callousness over the issue of Islam in the Balkans. We should not forget that it was the Turks who introduced Islam into the region and who built the cities of Sarajevo, Mostar, Jajce, Konjic, and others that are now sitting in ruin. They identify greatly with the monuments built by their ancestors and their coreligionists in that region. The West has asked much of the Turks in past decades-—to be a bulwark against Soviet Communism during the Cold War; to embargo goods from Iran and Iraq (much to the detriment of the Turkish economy); and, most recently, to act as a moderating influence and as a surrogate for the West in many of the new nations of Central Asia. In each case, Turkey has met these requests. The Turks are understandably upset, then, when the West does not respond to their call to protect Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina or Kos- ovo or to protect ethnic Turks in Cyprus or Bulgariaf’ Involvement by Turkey in any Balkan conflict would most assuredly guarantee that Greece would aid Ser- bia. Of all their territorial and ethnic problems, the Turks agree that it is the Greeks who are the most seri- ous for them. The worst case scenario probably hinges on the Bul- garians, not only because their country lies between Greece, Turkey, Serbia, and Macedonia but also because they have real grievances against the Serbs (over Macedonia) and Greeks (over Macedonia and Thrace). Bulgarians are nowvterrified about their neighbors going to war; they-wish to remain out of the fray. However, in the event that Greece and Serbia are fighting against Turkey and Albania, Bulgaria might be forced into the war. Bulgaria could side with Serbia ° Not only did Bulgaria maintain a policy of intimidation and per- secution of Bulgarian Muslims (Pomaks) during the 1970s and 1980s, which resulted in a substantial emigration of Pomaks to Turkey, but also in the late 1980s and early l990s more than 300,000 ethnic Turks fled Bulgaria _as a result of extreme oppres- sion. The West did little more than protest these acts. This was no different from the West's reaction to the Greeks’ infiltration of Cyprus and the mass murder of ethnic Turks. and Greece (their coreligionists) against the Muslim Turks and Albanians, but the Bulgarians have a deep hatred of the Greeks and Serbs, and Sofia would gain nothing from such a situation. On the other hand, if Bulgaria sided with Turkey and Albania, it could gain territory that it has demanded for two centuries- Yugoslav and Greek Macedonia, and Greek Thrace (thereby gaining access to the Aegean)——and address its grievances against Serbia and Greece. Turkey would certainly prefer Bulgarian hegemony over Thrace, thereby eliminating a border with Greece. Turkish seizure of the islands off its coast would also guarantee Turkey full access to the Mediterranean from Istanbul (something that is currently a problem for them because Greece is uncooperative on passage through its territorial waters by Turkish ships). If such a war broke out, the Croats and Muslims of Bosnia and Herzegovina would take revenge against the Serbs, and Hungary might use that as a way to seize some of the Hungarian-populated northern com- munes of Vojvodina. Hungarian involvement in an international dispute regarding Hungarians in another country might lead Romania and/or Slovakia to become aggressive against Hungary or the Hungarian minorities in their countries. If a major war broke out with Greece and Turkey on opposite sides, what would the West do? If it backed Greece and closed all possibilities of Turkey joining the EU, Turkey would undoubtedly shift away from the West to a more Islamic position. Clearly, internal pressures in Turkey-—which are already mounting—— would dictate such a move regardless of the desires of the moderate govemment. Even a neutral stance by the West would result in a Turkish popular backlash. Of great importance is the position of Russia as a major power. While Russia may back Serbia in its war against Croatia or the Bosnian Muslims, it would back Bulgaria and Turkey should they become allies against Serbia. Russia’s traditional ally in the Balkans has always been Bulgaria and not Serbia (which in the - Cold War sided with the anti-Soviet West). It would also be useful to Russia to use such a stance to improve 35 Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268
Not linked to a story yet.
FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 205 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.