ISIS Releases Dozens Of Turkish Hostages

The so-called “Islamic State” has released hostages originally taken at the Turkish consulate in Mosul:

The 49 hostageswere captured in the Iraqi city on 11 June as Isis seized control of large swaths of Iraq and Syria.

Their fate contrasts with the recent beheadings of two US journalists and a British aid worker by the Islamic militants.

The official Anadolu news agency reported that no ransom had been paid and “no conditions were accepted in return for their release”. It also said there were five or six previous attempts to secure the hostages’ release that had been unsuccessful.

Anadolu said they had been held at eight locations in Mosul, with their whereabouts monitored by drones and other means.

Forty-six of the consulate employees were Turks, along with three Iraqis. They included the consul-general, Ozturk Yilmaz, other diplomats, children and special forces police.

The hostages were released early on Saturday and arrived in Turkey at 5am local time (0300 BST), the Turkish prime minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, said. He returned early from a visit to Azerbaijan to meet them in the province of Sanliurfa, near Turkey’s border with Syria, and was bringing them back to Ankara on his plane.

Davutoglu said their release was the result of the Turkish intelligence agency’s “own methods”, and not a “point operation” involving special forces. He gave no further details.

BBC’s Mark Lowen provides this analysis:

When Turkey said it would not sign up to the military coalition against Islamic State, it was galling for the US. Turkey has the second largest army in Nato and hosts a huge US airbase. The reason was clear: with 49 hostages held by IS in Iraq, there was the fear of retribution if Turkey played too active a role.

Now that the group has been released, will it change Ankara’s stance? Unlikely. Turkey was reluctant to get too involved in the fight against IS. It shares long, vulnerable borders with Iraq and Syria, there is some recruitment of militants on its territory and it has large commercial interests in the region, which it fears could be targeted.

Critics say Turkey’s decision is because it has supported the militants against Syria’s President Assad, something Ankara denies. There is a precedent. In 2003, Turkey also refused the use of its base for the Iraq invasion. This vital western ally is wary of the fights it picks.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 Liberaland