VZCZCXYZ0003
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHAK #5582 2651459
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 221459Z SEP 06
FM AMEMBASSY ANKARA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8946
INFO RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME PRIORITY 6586
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC//USDP:PDUSDP/ISA:EUR/ISA:NESA/DSCA// PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC//J-3/J-5// PRIORITY
RUEUITH/ODC ANKARA TU PRIORITY
RHEHAAA/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEHAK/USDAO ANKARA TU PRIORITY
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY 5180
RHMFISS/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL PRIORITY
RHMFIUU/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY

UNCLAS ANKARA 005582 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV MARR TU
SUBJECT: TURKEY PROTESTS USE OF "PETERS MAP" IN NATO 
DEFENSE COLLEGE CLASS 
 
¶1. (SBU) MFA Deputy Director General for Americas Affairs 
Murat Esenli called us under instructions on September 21 to 
complain about the use at the NATO Defense College of a map 
authored by retired U.S. Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters that 
redraws the boundaries of Turkey and neighboring countries to 
create an independent Kurdistan.  He noted that the map was 
presented by an active-duty US colonel, and lamented that he 
had thought this was resolved. 
 
¶2. (SBU) This was Esenli's second call in six weeks on the 
"Peters map," which appeared in the June 2006 edition of 
Armed Forces Journal together with an article entitled "Blood 
Borders: How a Better Middle East Would Look," that received 
extensive coverage in Ankara.  In late July, he and other 
Turkish officials complained about the map, with some 
suggesting that it depicted the U.S. vision of the "new 
Middle East" outlined by Secretary Rice.  Not to miss an 
opportunity, the Turkish daily Cumhuriyet plastered the map 
across the front page of its July 27 edition. (Note: 
Cumhuriyet and Vatan dailies had both previously published 
the map and continue to do so.  End Note.) We responded with 
a press statement on August 3 -- which Esenli had requested 
to give the MFA its own ammunition against the map -- stating 
that neither the publication nor the author had any 
affiliation with the USG and that the opinions reflected in 
the article did not reflect US policy. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Esenli's September 21 call followed on the heels of 
an informal contact on September 20 by a retired Turkish 
military general close to current Deputy Chief of the General 
Staff (DCHOD) GEN Ergin Saygun, who noted the DCHOD's 
unhappiness with the use of the map.  According to the 
general, a NATO officer (presumably Turkish) in the class 
protested the presentation of the map as soon as it was 
unveiled but his request to have it taken down was rejected. 
As a result, the general said, Turkey's Ambassador to Italy 
was engaged on the issue.  (Note:  Colleagues with whom we 
spoke at Embassy Rome and US NATO were unaware of the map 
"crisis" or of any complaint by Turkey's missions to Italy or 
to NATO. End Note.) 
 
¶4. (SBU) COMMENT: We will continue to reinforce with our 
Turkish interlocutors that Peters' opinions do not reflect 
those of the US government and restate the importance with 
which we hold freedom of speech and the value of discussion 
and debate, particularly in establishments of higher 
learning.  The persistence of the story here, however, does 
highlight the government's sensitivity regarding the 
country's own territorial integrity.  END COMMENT. 
 
Visit Ankara's Classified Web Site at 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/ankara/ 
 
WILSON