US ENVOY INDIRECTLY JOINS PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM DEBATE IN TURKEY
Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
Feb 6 2015
The American administrative system, composed of three separate
but co-equal branches of government, is the result of 238 years of
experimentation and refinement, with a rigorous set of checks and
balances so power is distributed across all three branches, the U.S.
envoy to Ankara has said, indirectly joining an intense local debate
launched by the ruling party over how the Turkish presidential system
should be.
“Our president is our head of state and our head of government,
but he does not exercise full power to do anything, anywhere, at any
time. He is bound by a set of laws, he has to live within the budget
that is approved by Congress and his actions are subject to oversight
and scrutiny by Congress,” the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey, John Bass,
told NTV in an interview Feb. 6. “So, for us, we have found that to
be a very effective system, and, obviously, if others see value in our
structures for their societies, that is a matter for them to decide.”
Bass’ statement came at a time when President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
is gearing up his efforts to highlight the need to change the
administrative system from the current parliamentarian one to a
presidential system, either like France’s semi-presidential model or
the U.S. presidential system.
“It is an issue for Turkish citizens to decide. It properly, from our
perspective, should be a matter of public discussion and debate and
one that involves respect for as wide a range of views as possible
while changes are considered and evaluated in society,” Bass said.
The following is a summary of Bass’ responses during the interview
with NTV:
On the Ankara-Washington relationship: “It is important for us to
continue to work together. We do have our differences sometimes on
tactics and on priorities, but that is why we continue to work so
closely together to address them, because we believe we are always
stronger when we work together. (…) We are still strategic partners.
As I said, we have differences over tactics. We have differences
over relative priorities of some of the threats we face. But the
things that we share in common are still fundamentals and they are
the foundation of the relationship.”
On U.S.-based Islamic scholar Fethullah Gulen’s deportation: “I cannot
comment specifically about an individual. What I can tell you is
that in every case in which one of our allies and partners presents a
request for extradition, or a request for a legal proceeding against
one of their nationals who is present in the United States, we look
at that and evaluate it very carefully, very rigorously, involving
two of our three separate but co-equal branches of government – in
this case, the ministry of justice and the court system. And we would
evaluate the evidence that was presented and make a determination.”
On the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) as the priority:
“From our perspective, we believe that the most acute threat we face
and that the region faces right now is the threat posed by DAESH
[ISIL]. That’s why we are putting such a weight of effort behind
supporting all of those parties in the region who are working through
the coalition to combat this problem, to increase support to the Iraqi
government, to increase support to those elements in Syria that are
already fighting DAESH and are prepared to do more in that fight,
even as we continue to take steps to strengthen the moderate Syrian
opposition to pressure the [Syrian President Bashar] al-Assad regime
to come back to the table.”
On reactions against the United States: “I would say a couple things.
First, I think our record of support for people of this region seeking
to choose their own futures has been quite strong through this period.
I have to say I am disturbed by some of what I read and hear in the
Turkish press from many people in this society, alleging or asserting
that somehow Western policy or attitudes in the United States or in
Europe are responsible for the rise of this group of people who are
hijacking a religion for their own cynical, violent political ends.
And again, I think this is an issue where it is useful to take a
look at the facts and not simply concentrate on opinion. The fact
of the matter is that the United States spends $7 billion a year in
foreign assistance to five Muslim majority nations. Five of our top
six recipients of U.S. foreign assistance are Muslim nations. So, the
notion that this is somehow the result of a perspective in the United
States that opposes Islam simply could not be further from the truth.”
On meeting with Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) head Selahattin
DemirtaÃ…~_: “I meet with a wide range of people in society, in
government, outside of government. It is part of our effort to
understand what is going on in Turkey. I met with Mr. DemirtaÃ…~_,
along with the heads of many of the political factions. The choices
that the HDP is making are theirs to make. And they are clearly
evaluating the electoral landscape and making, from their perspective,
an informed decision. We will see how they do in the election. I
think the important thing here is that the election occurs, and the
campaign occurs, in a way that allows for every citizen of Turkey
who will be voting to have an opportunity to hear from a range of
parties and a range of perspectives and to make an informed choice
when they go to vote.”
On the U.S. position on the mass killing of Armenians: “I cannot speak
to how the events will be characterized in whatever the president or
Congress chooses to say on the anniversary, but, I can tell you that
our policy hasn’t changed. Our policy is that we believe that a full,
frank and just acknowledgement of the facts surrounding those terrible
massacres and tragedies in 1915 is in the interest of the citizens of
Turkey, it is in the interest of the citizens of Armenia and it is in
the interest of the descendants of people who suffered in that period.”
On U.S. participation in the 100th anniversary of the Battle of
Gallipoli: “It is too early to say how we will be represented
in Gallipoli. I would say, with respect to the timing of the
commemorations, you know there is so much depth of feeling and so much
suffering that occurred in 1915 among many populations that, I think,
from our perspective, we think that commemorations should occur in
a way that allows every community that suffered to commemorate the
events in a way and in a manner that is respectful of the dead and
that allows them in their own ways to acknowledge that suffering and
to commemorate their dead respectfully.”
February/06/2015