Turkish FM expresses support for Bosnia

"Speaking in Sarajevo, he also said that Turkey is prepared to offer support to Bosnia-Herzegovina "in all segments"."

The fact that is is not speaking in Banja Luka, probably because he was not invited there, says enough to me. What segments is he referring to? Because Republica Srpska does not need Turkey's support.

"Davutoglu met today with officials of the Bosnia-Herzegovina Presidency Haris Silajdžić and Željko Komšić."

No surprise there.

"He said that “Bosnia-Herzegovina must remain united, but that greater involvement by Bosnia on the regional level is also needed.”"

Recognizing Kosovo's illegal UDI killed all meaning of this comment. About autonomy for the Kurds in Turkey?

"Davutoglu congratulated Bosnian on being selected into the UN Security Council non-permanent membership and said that Turkey supports Bosnia on the road to full-fledged NATO membership."

Why are all these NATO countries so eager to keep expanding this offense organization? By controlling all of the Balkans does NATO want to prevent the mistake that Nazi Germany made before invading the Soviet Union? Or do they need more troops for all the imperialistic wars that are going on and that will be in the future?

"He also stated that Turkey offers "unconditional support" for the liberalization of EU visa regime for Bosnian citizens, adding that Turkey “is in active relations with Spain, the country that will take over the next EU presidency.”"

As a non-EU member Turkey can have an opinion, but nobody will listen to Turkey on these matters. Turkey will never be offered visa liberation and few countries will do PR on behalf of Turkey.

"“The international community owes Bosnia-Herzegovina a lot, and this is not only in the sense of a political debt, but also a debt to the peoples of Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Davutoglu was quoted as saying."

The international community had done nothing to prevent the bloodshed in BiH and if it was kept an internal matter things would have been solved more quickly and less bloody.

"The Turkish minister said that stability, functionality and progress in Bosnia are at the top of the list of Turkey’s priorities, adding that this stance is given to other international officials whenever he talks about the situation in Bosnia."

Still acting with an Ottoman mentality. Not much has changed in the past 90+ years.

"Silajdžić and Komšić said that relations between Bosnia and Turkey are very good and friendly on all levels, according to a statement from the Bosnia-Herzegovina presidency."

Turkey does not have to be treated as an enemy, but I would be extremely cautious and never forget the 500 years of occupation that bears a big responsibility for many of the past, current, and future problems of this volatile region of the Balkans.

""He also stated that Turkey offers "unconditional support" for the liberalization of EU visa regime for Bosnian citizens""

Who is Turkey to support their support for the EU visas?? An EU member state? We must be kidding here.... Turkey should first worry about her EU candidancy and the fact that actually nobody in the EU wants them in, than supporting other countries to their EU ambitions.

Davutoglu's commments regarding Turkish support for some countries is nothing more than the usual Turkish waffle-that is to show you do a lot whereas in fact you do nothing.

The much publicised Armenian road map which would have resulted in thenormalisation of relations between Turkey and Armenia has gone off the rails after Ajerbajian threatened Turkey with cuts in energy supplies if went ahead with it.

The same situation emerged with Iran after Turkey agreed to act as a go between the US and Iran.Erdogan made astatement in Tehran calling themullahs his brothers who were resisting US imperialism.

As far as the Balkans are concerned, Davutoglu's position is pretty clear-that is the restoration of Ottoman influence and the caliphate.The Fyrom-Bosnia-Albania triangle will pose many peoblems for the Christian countries in the Balkans.This is why Turkish influence in the Balkan must be kept to the minimum

Turkey does not have to be treated as an enemy
(Milan, 14 December 2009 18:29)

I would be cautious on that: there was NOT A SINGLE OCCASION during the last 500 years, Turkey would be not the enemy of Poland / Ukraina / Russia. And with Hungary or Serbia: the biggest mistakes few Hungarian and Serbian leaders ever made was to treat the Turks as ally.

Should I remind you: the Serbian victory 1389 turned in few month to a defeat because the German-Roman emperor Sigizmund (also Czech and Hungarian king Zsigmond, same who executed Jan Hus) invaded Serbia and Serbs had to ally with Turks under very bad conditions - just to kick Sigismund out. Queen Milica could not fight on two fronts. She chose (wrongly) the side which look less dangerous.

Also - wrongly again - the Serbs supported Sultan Bayazid (who actually LOST the Kosovo battle, his father being killed) later against Mongols+Persians during the battle of Ankara - and lost that battle.

Crimean Tatars were much more clever and switched sides during the battle and attacked Bayazid in the rear. Stupid Serbs fought to death - supporting their enemy.

Hungarian history is also full of such idiotic deeds.

No Turkey-bird for Europe, sorry. Best for vacation only, serving Serbian or Russian tourists for as little money as possible. That's the only European role of Turkey I envision. ;-)

Greece ,Serbia are are the same trouble makers as Turkey only difference who has the bigger stick.

Greece ,Serbia are are the same trouble makers as Turkey only difference who has the bigger stick.

Davutoglu's commments regarding Turkish support for some countries is nothing more than the usual Turkish waffle-that is to show you do a lot whereas in fact you do nothing.

The much publicised Armenian road map which would have resulted in thenormalisation of relations between Turkey and Armenia has gone off the rails after Ajerbajian threatened Turkey with cuts in energy supplies if went ahead with it.

The same situation emerged with Iran after Turkey agreed to act as a go between the US and Iran.Erdogan made astatement in Tehran calling themullahs his brothers who were resisting US imperialism.

As far as the Balkans are concerned, Davutoglu's position is pretty clear-that is the restoration of Ottoman influence and the caliphate.The Fyrom-Bosnia-Albania triangle will pose many peoblems for the Christian countries in the Balkans.This is why Turkish influence in the Balkan must be kept to the minimum

"Speaking in Sarajevo, he also said that Turkey is prepared to offer support to Bosnia-Herzegovina "in all segments"."

The fact that is is not speaking in Banja Luka, probably because he was not invited there, says enough to me. What segments is he referring to? Because Republica Srpska does not need Turkey's support.

"Davutoglu met today with officials of the Bosnia-Herzegovina Presidency Haris Silajdžić and Željko Komšić."

No surprise there.

"He said that “Bosnia-Herzegovina must remain united, but that greater involvement by Bosnia on the regional level is also needed.”"

Recognizing Kosovo's illegal UDI killed all meaning of this comment. About autonomy for the Kurds in Turkey?

"Davutoglu congratulated Bosnian on being selected into the UN Security Council non-permanent membership and said that Turkey supports Bosnia on the road to full-fledged NATO membership."

Why are all these NATO countries so eager to keep expanding this offense organization? By controlling all of the Balkans does NATO want to prevent the mistake that Nazi Germany made before invading the Soviet Union? Or do they need more troops for all the imperialistic wars that are going on and that will be in the future?

"He also stated that Turkey offers "unconditional support" for the liberalization of EU visa regime for Bosnian citizens, adding that Turkey “is in active relations with Spain, the country that will take over the next EU presidency.”"

As a non-EU member Turkey can have an opinion, but nobody will listen to Turkey on these matters. Turkey will never be offered visa liberation and few countries will do PR on behalf of Turkey.

"“The international community owes Bosnia-Herzegovina a lot, and this is not only in the sense of a political debt, but also a debt to the peoples of Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Davutoglu was quoted as saying."

The international community had done nothing to prevent the bloodshed in BiH and if it was kept an internal matter things would have been solved more quickly and less bloody.

"The Turkish minister said that stability, functionality and progress in Bosnia are at the top of the list of Turkey’s priorities, adding that this stance is given to other international officials whenever he talks about the situation in Bosnia."

Still acting with an Ottoman mentality. Not much has changed in the past 90+ years.

"Silajdžić and Komšić said that relations between Bosnia and Turkey are very good and friendly on all levels, according to a statement from the Bosnia-Herzegovina presidency."

Turkey does not have to be treated as an enemy, but I would be extremely cautious and never forget the 500 years of occupation that bears a big responsibility for many of the past, current, and future problems of this volatile region of the Balkans.

""He also stated that Turkey offers "unconditional support" for the liberalization of EU visa regime for Bosnian citizens""

Who is Turkey to support their support for the EU visas?? An EU member state? We must be kidding here.... Turkey should first worry about her EU candidancy and the fact that actually nobody in the EU wants them in, than supporting other countries to their EU ambitions.

Turkey does not have to be treated as an enemy
(Milan, 14 December 2009 18:29)

I would be cautious on that: there was NOT A SINGLE OCCASION during the last 500 years, Turkey would be not the enemy of Poland / Ukraina / Russia. And with Hungary or Serbia: the biggest mistakes few Hungarian and Serbian leaders ever made was to treat the Turks as ally.

Should I remind you: the Serbian victory 1389 turned in few month to a defeat because the German-Roman emperor Sigizmund (also Czech and Hungarian king Zsigmond, same who executed Jan Hus) invaded Serbia and Serbs had to ally with Turks under very bad conditions - just to kick Sigismund out. Queen Milica could not fight on two fronts. She chose (wrongly) the side which look less dangerous.

Also - wrongly again - the Serbs supported Sultan Bayazid (who actually LOST the Kosovo battle, his father being killed) later against Mongols+Persians during the battle of Ankara - and lost that battle.

Crimean Tatars were much more clever and switched sides during the battle and attacked Bayazid in the rear. Stupid Serbs fought to death - supporting their enemy.

Hungarian history is also full of such idiotic deeds.

No Turkey-bird for Europe, sorry. Best for vacation only, serving Serbian or Russian tourists for as little money as possible. That's the only European role of Turkey I envision. ;-)