The Turkey- U.S. Divide

Los Angeles Times, CA
June 8 2005
The Turkey- U.S. Divide
Lack of understanding strains a vital relationship.
By Ekrem Dumanli, Ekrem Dumanli is executive editor of Zaman, a
national newspaper headquartered in Istanbul.
What’s gone wrong between the U.S. and Turkey? Plagued by
misinformation and misperception, the two countries have seen
significant deterioration in their relations over the last few years.
Rising wrath against Turkey in Washington, especially at the
Pentagon, is threatening what has long been a strong, important
relationship. It seems to be a response, in turn, to a perceived rise
in anti-Americanism in Turkey. But this is a mistake. The roots of
the problem lay, for the most part, in misunderstanding.
ADVERTISEMENT

Just as the Iraq war was beginning in early 2003, Turkey rejected a
U.S. effort to open a northern front. For many U.S. officials, this
was an indication of growing anti-Americanism. Although it is true
that the Turkish parliament rejected the motion, the context has been
badly misunderstood.
On that day – March 1, 2003 – 533 lawmakers voted on the motion. Of
those, 264 were in favor, 250 rejected it and 19 abstained. The
motion required a simple majority, 267 votes; it was rejected for
want of three votes. The vote was so close that for a few minutes
after the voting it was believed that the motion had been approved.
In short, much of the wrath against Turkey in Washington, especially
in Pentagon circles, is based on just three votes.
In October 2003, the parliament agreed to send as many as 10,000
troops to Iraq to help in reconstruction and peacekeeping. This time
the vote was 358 to 183 in favor of deployment. But Turkey got little
credit for its willingness to help because the plan fell apart when
the Iraqi Governing Council announced that it did not want Turkish
troops. In yet another effort to cooperate with Washington, Turkey
subsequently agreed to send troops to Afghanistan, and the Turkish
army has twice taken command of the International Security Assistance
Force there.
I’m not denying that the last two years have been a tense period for
the two countries. There’s no doubt that the Turkish people, in line
with global public opinion, were worried about the occupation of
Iraq. Although Turks hated Saddam Hussein and wished for an end to
his rule, they were also concerned about a war in the region. Not
just because it was becoming clear that there were no weapons of mass
destruction and no link between Hussein and Al Qaeda, but because
they were afraid the war would spread to neighboring countries such
as Syria and Iran.
And it is certainly true that the horrible images from Fallouja and
Abu Ghraib shocked Turkish society, as they shocked the people of
many nations. When one also considers that Iraqis are Muslims and
that many mosques were in the war zone, the Turkish public’s concern
may be better understood.
But Turkish reservations about Bush administration policies in the
Middle East do not make us “anti-American.” Yes, there was one
Turkish member of parliament who said last year that the U.S. was
conducting “genocide” in Fallouja – but it must be remembered that
routine pressure is put on Turkey regarding Armenian allegations of
“genocide” after World War II. For many Turks, this is annually
discussed, debated and forgotten – they see the so-called genocide as
a false accusation, and the word itself is viewed as an exaggeration.
So when one parliamentarian accuses the U.S. of “genocide” in Iraq,
it does not carry the harsh meaning that Americans have reacted to.
After Sept. 11, many Muslims in the U.S. returned to their countries,
Turks among them. This trend accelerated after the invasion of Iraq.
But despite post-Sept. 11 anxiety and difficulty in obtaining visas,
statistics indicate that Turkish families and their children still
opt for a U.S. education when possible.
The Turkish people believe that the U.S. helped Muslims in Bosnia and
Kosovo. They haven’t forgotten that the leader of the terrorist
Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK), Abdullah Ocalan, was caught with U.S.
assistance. Nor have they overlooked U.S. support for Turkey’s
membership in the European Union.
Despite years of “strategic partnership,” the policymakers of the two
countries don’t fully understand each other. Turkey asks the U.S. to
take concrete action against the PKK militants in Iraq, but this is
not a high priority for the Americans. Armenian genocide allegations
are raised like clockwork in the U.S. Congress, but so far the
Turkish government has not formally recognized that such a thing
occurred. If that changes, the Turkish public will not react calmly.
Each party tries to evaluate the other side within the framework of
its own political culture and experience. This can cause confusion
and ill will. But these two countries need each other. At a time when
potential global conflicts exist in abundance along cultural and
religious lines, Turkey can play a major role as an “example” of a
nation that is modern, democratic and Muslim all at the same time.

Revitalizing U.S.-Turkey relations

Washington Times, DC
June 8 2005
Revitalizing U.S.-Turkey relations
By Frank Carlucci/F. Stephen Larrabee
The White House meeting between Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan and President Bush today provides an important opportunity to
revitalize U.S.-Turkish relations, badly frayed by the American-led
invasion of Iraq.
A strong partnership with Turkey is very much in the U.S.
interest. Turkey is located the nexus of three areas of increasing
strategic importance to the United States: Europe, the Caspian/Black
Sea region, and the Middle East. In each areas, Turkish cooperation
is vital to achievingU.S. interests.
However, U.S.-Turkish relations have badly deteriorated of late.
Differences over Iraq have been accompanied by a disturbing growth of
anti-Americanism in Turkey. A recent poll by the German Marshall
Fund, for instance, found 82 percent of Turks polled did not support
U.S. policy. If these trends continue, they could irreparably harm
long-term U.S.-Turkish relations.
Recently, however, there have been signs both sides want improved
relations. In May, the Turkish parliament agreed to allow the United
States to use the Turkish airbase at Incirlik as a logistics hub for
transporting cargo to Iraq and Afghanistan. And in April the U.S. and
Turkey signed a $1.1 billion deal for upgrading of 117 F-16 fighter
jets.
These positive developments can serve as building blocks to
develop a revitalized Turkish-American partnership and new strategic
agenda. The key items on this agenda should include:
– Iraq: The United States and Turkey share a common interest in
the emergence of a stable democratic Iraq. But the Turks worry that
increasing Kurdish influence in Iraq – especially in the oil-rich
city of Kirkuk – could lead to the emergence of an independent
Kurdish state on Turkey’s borders and strengthen separatism among
Turkey’s large Kurdish population. Ankara also wants the U.S. to
clamp down on militants of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party
(PKK), which has recently stepped up cross-border attacks from safe
havens in northern Iraq. If the U.S. continues ignoring Turkey’s
pleas, Turkish anti-American sentiment is likely to grow, and Turkey
may feel compelled to take unilateral action against the PKK in
northern Iraq.
– Broader Middle East democratization: As a secular Muslim
country, Turkey can play an important role in supporting democracy in
the Middle East. But the U.S. should avoid touting Turkey as a model,
as some U.S. policymakers are wont to do. Many Turks, especially the
military and the secular Westernized elite, are wary of being
portrayed as an “Islamic model,” which they fear will strengthen the
role of Islam in Turkey and weaken Turkey’s ties to the West. In a
toughly worded speech at the end of April the head of the Turkish
general staff, Gen. Hilmi Ozkok, strongly denied Turkey was a model
for the Islamic world. Moreover, Turkey’s image in the Arab world is
tarnished by its imperial past and its strong ties to Israel.
– Iran: Turkey and the United States also share a common
interest in containing Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Neither wants to see
a nuclear-armed Iran. At the same time, Turkey has an important
interest in maintaining good economic and political relations with
Tehran, a major natural gas source for Turkey’s expanding needs.
Turkey also shares a common interest with Iran in containing Kurdish
separatism. Thus the United States cannot expect Turkey to support
totally isolating Iran.
-Central Asia and the Caucasus: A strategic dialogue on
cooperation in these areas should be a top priority for both sides.
Both countries share an interest in stabilizing this conflict-ridden
region. In particular, they should work together to help resolve the
conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. A settlement would open new
possibilities for improved relations between Armenia and Turkey and
also allow Armenia to reduce its dependence on Russia.
– Europe: Turkey’s entry into the European Union is in the
long-term interest of the United States. It will make Europe a
stronger strategic partner and strengthen efforts to promote
democratic reform in Turkey. At the same time, Washington needs to
recognize that Turkish membership in the EU – if achieved – will
result in a more “Europeanized” Turkey, one which looks increasingly
to Brussels rather than to Washington.
– Cyprus: Finally, both sides need to work together to promote a
Cyprus settlement. Turkey has done its part. Last spring, the Turkish
Cypriots, backed by Turkey, voted for the plan sponsored by U.N.
Secretary General Kofi Annan. The Greek Cypriots, however, rejected
the plan. The election in April of Mehmet Ali Talat, new president of
Turkish Cyprus, has boosted hopes for progress toward an eventual
settlement.
Unlike his predecessor, Rauf Denktas, Mr. Talat supports the
Annan plan and resumed bicommunal talks with Greek Cyprus.
None of these changes would end all U.S.-Turkish differences. But
they would help put relations back on a much firmer footing and
contribute to a critically important regional stability.

Frank Carlucci is a former defense secretary and national
security adviser in the Reagan administration, and a member of the
RAND Corp. board of trustees. F. Stephen Larrabee was a member of the
Carter administration National Security Council staff and holds the
RAND Corporate Chair in European Security.

Turks, Armenians climb Armenia’s highest mountain

Armenpress
TURKS, ARMENIANS CLIMB ARMENIA’S HIGHEST MOUNTAIN
YEREVAN, JUNE 8, ARMENPRESS: Armenia’s highest mountain Aragats, that was
encircled by thousands of Armenians on May 28 for a circle dance, will
witness today un unprecedented Turkish-Armenian endeavor when seven
Armenian, four Turkish and one Iranian alpinists will reach its summit.
The ascend of Turkish climbers was allowed by Turkish foreign ministry
and Turkey’s federation of alpinists, which however, have rejected many
requests of Armenian climbers seeking permission to ascend the Mount Ararat.
Mount Aragats is 4,090 meters above the sea level and is the fourth highest
mountain on the Armenian Plateau.

Armenian invitation to Greek investors

Macedonian Press Agency, Greece
June 8 2005
ARMENIAN INVITATION TO GREEK INVESTORS
Yerevan, 8 June 2005 (14:34 UTC+2)

Armenia is ready to welcome even more Greek and other foreign
investors, offering a wide spectrum of incentives, according to a
statement made to MPA by Armenian Deputy Prime Minister Movik
Abrahamyan.
He also underlined that Turkey must reopen the borders without
preconditions to facilitate the transportation of goods.
Armenian President Kocharyan personally oversees the whole process
confirmed Mr. Abrahamian.
Specifically, on the occasion of the events held within the framework
of the Business Conference held in Yerevan by the Black Sea Trade and
Development Bank, Mr. Abrahamyan stressed to MPA that Armenia is
ready to welcome and embrace the Greek investors.
Mr. Abrahamyan also stated that Armenia offers to investors a very
liberal taxation framework while there is a special approach,
offering significant incentives, for major investments. He added that
Armenian President Kocharyan personally oversees the whole process
while senior officials of the Armenian government have regular
meetings with foreign investors to deal immediately with any obstacle
to the investment activity.
Mr. Abrahamyan confirmed that Armenia is in a process of constant
adjustment and improvement of its legislation based on international
dictates and in cooperation with the responsible EU bodies. He added
that the country’s geographic position, the rich natural resources,
the constant development of infrastructure and cheap labor, are
key-factors for the entry of more foreign investors in the Armenian
market. He also gave an emphasis on the issue of transparency in
transactions, stressing that state agencies are well aware that
strict sanctions will be imposed in case of irregularities.

ANKARA: Quo Vadis EU?

The New Anatolian, Turkey
June 8 2005
Quo Vadis EU?
by Nursun Erel
-Ankara watches developments carefully. After PM Erdogan’s US visit,
the govt is preparing visits to several EU member capitals
-During these visits a message of ‘Don’t place new conditions in
front of us’ will be given to European leaders
-Greek Cypriots are working very hard to add a ‘Turkey paragraph’ to
the EU summit’s final declaration
The government is preparing consecutive visits to European capitals
to follow up on Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s U.S. visit. The
scheduled visits will start after the European Union summit in
Brussels on June 16-17. Erdogan, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, and
Turkey’s chief negotiator to the EU Ali Babacan will go to Britain,
Germany, and Austria. During these visits, Turkey will declare its
concerns about the “privileged partnership formula,” which has been
bandied about lately, especially by French and German political
circles, as an alternative to full EU membership. The prime minister
and his top officials will also deliver to European leaders the
message not to place new hurdles in front of Turkey before its
negotiations start.
Greek efforts at EU summit
It is expected that the Greek Cypriots will push hard for a “Turkey
paragraph” in the final declaration at the upcoming EU summit in
Brussels. The Greeks want Turkey to open their harbors and airports
to Greek shipping and commercial airplanes. Greek Cypriot leader
Tassos Papadopoulos is putting his best efforts forward to reach this
target by talking to top EU officials in Luxembourg.
The rejection of the EU constitution in referendums in France and the
Netherlands, the shelved referendum in Britain, and controversy over
the euro are being carefully watched in Ankara. Sources closely
following these developments spoke to The New Anatolian about these
issues.
“Right after these developments it’s true that question marks
appeared concerning the future of the EU,” said one source. “In fact,
there may be some additional changes such as a change in government
in Germany after elections. That’s why the privileged partnership
formula for Turkey has been brought to the table and discussed so
often. But we are keeping our focus on full membership and minding
our own business. We won’t even discuss that formula, we simply
continue to work for our goal. What about the pessimistic talk over
the euro? Well, these are like the summer winds, they’ll only be
around for a short while. Enormous efforts and money were spent to
develop the euro, so it’s almost ridiculous to suggest abandoning it.
So now we are awaiting the completion of the upcoming EU summit.
We’ll first see the declaration, and this will be an important
indicator on our way to negotiations.”
Consecutive EU visits
Recently, statements coming from EU capitals such as ones proposing a
“privileged partnership formula” or demanding that Turkey withdraw
its troops from Cyprus as soon as possible and admit to the Armenian
“genocide” have been worrying Ankara. Turkish officials are concerned
that such talk may be an attempt to slow down Turkey’s negotiation
process, and have organized visits to several EU capitals to state
their positions directly to their European colleagues.
During the visits, Prime Minister Erdogan, Foreign Minister Gul, and
chief negotiator Babacan are expected to tell their European
counterparts: “Don’t expect further sacrifices from Turkey. If not,
there could be negative implications for the EU, because Turkey has
done everything asked of it up to now. If the message coming from
French and Dutch voters is translated to mean that they reject
Turkey’s membership in Europe, this is a problem that needs to be
solved by their governments. They were responsible for fostering
their publics’ opinions. They provoked the situation.”

Baku response to Russian arms transfer politically motivated

Interfax, Russia
June 8 2005
Baku response to Russian arms transfer politically motivated –
opinion
YEREVAN. June 8 (Interfax) – Baku’s negative response to the transfer
of Russian military hardware from Georgia to Armenia has political
rather than military motives, head of the Armenian parliamentary
defense, national security, and internal affairs commission Mger
Shakhgeldian told Interfax on Wednesday.
“The Russian military bases in Armenia are a component of the
republic’s national security,” he said.
“Armenia is interested in developing a regional security system in
the South Caucasus,” Shakhgeldian said. “The international community
has taken quite a positive view of the idea to set up a regional
security system in the South Caucasus in the future, and we believe
it is possible and necessary to build such a structure in the
future,” he said.

ANKARA: Belgium Rejects Armenian Bill for ‘Now’

Zaman, Turkey
June 8 2005
Belgium Rejects Armenian Bill for ‘Now’
By Selcuk Gultasli, Vedat Denizli
Published: Wednesday 08, 2005
zaman.com
The Belgium Senate Justice Commission disapproved a bill for prison
terms and monetary fines for those, who “deny” the so-called Armenian
“genocide” allegations.
The main bill regarding the crimes in the Internet environment, on
the other hand, will be returned to Parliament. Belgium’s Justice
Minister Laurette Onkelix said if the bill had passed into law, an
investigation on Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan could
have been launched during his Belgium visit based on the reason that
he was viewed as a so-called “denier”. The bill, which was rejected
with 12 “no” votes to two “yes” votes at the Justice Commission on
Monday, will be returned to the Federal Assembly after the Senate’s
General Assembly discusses it. Senators of the Justice Commission
remarked, the Walloon Liberal Party (Mouvement Reformateur” (MR) and
the Walloon Greens Party _both support the so-called Armenian
allegations_ might demand to reopen the issue for debate again at the
Federal Assembly; however, they are not likely to receive any
support.
The issue will not come to the agenda again until the local elections
in October 2006 it is expected. During the discussions closely
observed by the Armenian lobby, Onkelix emphasized that the issue
should be handled after negotiations with nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs), which form sides regarding the issue. If the
bill had been approved in Parliament, Belgium as the capital of the
European Union (EU) would have been the first country to punish those
who deny the so-called Armenian “genocide” allegations. The issue
however will be carried to the agenda again during the Belgium
elections.
While debates on the bill, which both the Walloon and Fleming
socialists as a bloc are against, continue, Senator Fatma Pehlivan,
of Turkish decent, stressed that the bill might have serious
consequences. If an international attitude regarding the so-called
Armenian genocide allegations is adopted without a court decision,
similar to what happened in the US and Congo should also been taken
into account, Pehlivan emphasized and said if the bill is approved,
this would damage peace and harmony in Belgian society. Onkelinx, on
the other side, underlined the bill is “unacceptable” because the
so-called Armenian genocide allegations have no legal ground.
Onkelinx referring to the Nuremberg Court for the Holocaust signified
that no such court exists regarding the so-called Armenian
allegations. They are playing with fire, he said. Members of the MR
and ECOLO parties, which demanded punishment for “deniers”, cite the
Armenian rebellion as the start date of the so-called genocide;
however, do not touch upon the massacres that Belgium committed in
the Congo during the 19th century, which was defined by many
historians as “genocide”.
Watching the debates closely, executive director of the European
Armenian Federation Laurent Leylekian said the disapproval is a
“failure” for them; however, they achieved the initiation of
discussion on the subject. Leylekian indicating that the Belgium
Senate’s decision dated June 7 turned Turkey’s “denial” into a
political gimmick for EU member countries, claimed, it would be
impossible to defend the so-called Armenian genocide allegations in
Europe if Turkey becomes an EU member. Leylekian also told Zaman,
that the issue would only start to be discussed in Turkey with the
implementation of punishments for the denial of the so-called
genocide allegations.

House members urge Bush to raise Armenian blockade issue

House members urge Bush to raise Armenian blockade issue
08.06.2005 14:41
YEREVAN (YERKIR) – In the days leading up to Wednesday’s meeting
between Pres. Bush and Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
members of the US House of Representatives raised serious concerns
about Turkey’s 12-year blockade of Armenia, reported the Armenian
National Committee of America (ANCA.)
In a June 3rd letter, Congressional Armenian Caucus Co-Chairs Joe
Knollenberg (R-MI) and Frank Pallone (D-NJ) were joined by Reps.
Adam Schiff (D-CA) and George Radanovich (R-CA) in urging Pres.
Bush and Secretary of State Rice to “again call upon Turkey to
comply with your Administration’s long-standing position that in
order to restore economic, political, and cultural links with
Armenia, Turkey should immediately lift its ongoing blockade with
Armenia.”
The House members detailed the high cost of Turkey’s blockade on
Armenia’s struggling economy. “A recent State Department report
estimated that the blockade is inflating Armenia’s transportation
costs by 30-35%, thereby stifling its trade and economy,” noted the
letter. “This report also stated that opening the border would
catalyze commercial opportunities for Turkey and Armenia in the
fields of energy, trade and tourism, valued at $1 billion per
year.”

Job vacancies at Pyunic Association of the Disabled in Yerevan

Press Release:
Contact: Hakob Abrahamyan
Pyunic Association of the Disabled
16 Tsitsernakaberd Street,
Yerevan
Phone: 56 07 07
56 08 17
Job Announcement
Armenian Association for the Disabled `Pyunic ` announces the
following vacant positions in the project `Early Intervention’:
psychologist
speech therapist
physiotherapist
special educator
Priority will be given to young and experienced candidates.
Please send your CVs to [email protected]
or to the mailing address:
Pyunik
16 Tsitsernakaberd Street,
Yerevan
Armenia
Application deadline is the 9th of June 2005.

ANKARA: ‘Love Tree’ Planted into the World’s Heart

Zaman Online, Turkey
June 8 2005
‘Love Tree’ Planted into the World’s Heart
By Zaman
Published: Wednesday 08, 2005
zaman.com
The Dialogue Eurasia Platform has planted a “Tree of Love” at its
opening ceremony in Moscow to a global presence that included 14
spiritual leaders and religious representatives from around the
world.
Students assisted the clerics in planting and watering the symbolic
olive tree. Russian students carried banners that read, “Love and
Tolerance for World Peace”. Turkey Armenians Deputy Patriarch Priest
Shahak Mashalian evaluated the meeting to Zaman saying, “There was
nothing like the symbol of this tree 10-15 years ago. We will see the
fruits of the dialogue a few years later just as we will see the
fruits on the tree. Symbols are very important in religion.” The
Azerbaijan Ataturk Center President added, “Sending the
inter-religious dialogue message from the Koloniy Zal saloon, where
once there was not any concept except that of official Communist
ideology, gives us hope for the future.” Those participating in the
international forum include Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Ukraine,
Azerbaijan, Indonesia, India, US, Germany and Belgium.