CICEK: WITHOUT TURKEY, THE EU CANNOT BE A STRATEGIC POWER
Today’s Zaman
Feb 9 2009
Turkey
State Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Cemil Cicek has said that
the Christian Democrats who have assumed office in EU member countries
have been cool toward Turkey’s prospective membership.
He argued that the EU’s negative and obstructive attitude has been
encouraging those groups who oppose Turkey’s EU membership. "This also
reinforces the Turkish people’s perception that the EU is not inclined
to accept Turkey as a member, regardless of how well it performs,"
he said. "There must be popular support for the membership process,
but negative statements and attitudes are wearing down this support."
Cicek reiterated that Turkey faces great difficulties as a prospective
EU member in the midst of negotiations. "Nevertheless, we, as the
government, have not slackened in our determination with regard to
the EU process. We are not hesitant in the least about it. I believe
— this is also the government’s view — that Turkey’s negotiations
for the EU process are beneficial provided that Turkey becomes an EU
member in the end," he said. He emphasized that the EU has not been
able to emerge as a power that can solve international crises. "In
this respect, it needs Turkey as a member that can make contributions
to settling crises," he argued.
Cicek also touched on the ongoing Ergenekon investigation. "We must
have complete confidence in the judicial process and wait for the
conclusion of the trial. People should refrain from making assessments
from their own political standpoints and patiently let the process
take its natural course," he said. "Doing otherwise is wrong."
Cicek is not only the wise man of the ruling Justice and Development
Party (AK Party), but also the memory of the history of Turkish
administration since the Motherland Party (ANAP, now ANAVATAN)
government that first took office in 1983. He spoke with Today’s Zaman
for an interview recently, as it is his custom to do an interview
with one newspaper after every Cabinet meeting.
The year 2009 was announced as the year of the EU. We did the same
in 2008, but we were unable to accomplish it then. Do you believe
Turkey’s EU bid is back on track?
Every piece of legislation related to the Copenhagen criteria
had been drafted by the Justice Ministry ahead of the start of
Turkey’s negotiations with the EU. Today, Turkey can proceed with
its negotiations thanks to the infrastructure the Justice Ministry
laid during my time as its head. Turkey is currently a negotiating
country, but it faces great difficulties. Nevertheless, we, as the
government, have not slackened in our determination with regard to
the EU process. We are not hesitant in the least about it. I believe
— this is also the government’s view — that Turkey’s negotiations
for the EU process are beneficial provided that Turkey becomes an EU
member in the end.
‘Today the EU is not a problem-solving power’
What if it does not end with full membership?
This is a thing that we are not willing to even discuss. We do not
want to think about such a possibility. This is because the primary
target of the negotiations we are conducting is to attain full
membership. We go on with the negotiations on the condition that we
will become a full member in the end. We have never considered any
alternative. We will not accept any preliminary condition other than
full membership. This is a point that everyone should be aware of.
Turkey’s EU membership will be to the benefit not only of Turkey, but
also the EU. Indeed, the EU is today an economic power. It can also be
regarded as a political power. But it is not a strategic power. It is
not a problem-solving power in the international arena. This is only
possible through Turkey’s membership. There are examples to prove this
point. For instance, more than 25,000 people were massacred in the
middle of Europe, i.e., in Bosnia. Despite the fact that this region
was part of Europe, the EU could not do anything about this massacre.
Similarly, there was another massacre in Kosovo. The EU failed
to act to prevent this tragedy that happened in its immediate
vicinity. Moreover, the EU was ineffective concerning the incidents in
the Middle East and the Caucasus. Today the EU is not a problem-solving
power with respect to any international crisis. In this respect,
it needs Turkey as a member that can make contributions to settling
crises.
Yet, you, too, would agree that there has been a general slowdown in
the process. Why?
There are several reasons for the slowdown in the process. One of these
factors can be grouped as obstacles caused by the EU itself. Initially,
the process was quite fast. There were countries in Europe that
were warm to the idea of accepting Turkey as an EU member. These
countries were being ruled by social democratic governments. Now
the Christian Democrats, or the parties that oppose Turkey’s EU
membership, are now in power throughout Europe. These governments
either have a distorted view about Turkey’s EU membership or propose
other options for Turkey. Second, the prerequisite for Turkey starting
negotiations with the EU has long been advertised as its fulfillment
of the Copenhagen criteria. We have satisfactorily fulfilled these
criteria. Indeed, [EU Commission Vice President] Gunter Verheugen
said at the time that there were no more problems. But they placed
the Cyprus issue on the table.
However, it was never mentioned as a prerequisite. The EU made another
wrong move and made the Greek Cypriots a full member, even though
they had ongoing disputes with their neighbors and were not inclined
to solve them. The Greek Cypriots have dominated the EU’s policies.
With respect to the Cyprus issue, the EU has not only failed to
offer any solution, but it has also started to block any move toward
settling the issue. By doing so, it shows that it is not and will
not become a strategic power. They have admitted this halfheartedly,
but they still lend support to the Greek Cypriots and they want every
step to be taken by the Turkish side.
This is the EU’s crooked conception of justice. Its scales are
insensitive and wrong. They have blocked eight out of 33 negotiating
chapters because of the Greek Cypriots. Five chapters were blocked by
France. The screening reports under 10 chapters are yet to be sent to
Turkey. When these are removed from the table, nothing significant
remains for negotiations. There are already 10 chapters that were
opened. There remain only six chapters. Those who complain about a
slowdown must realize this.
So you are putting all the blame on the EU. Aren’t there any
developments in Turkey that have blocked the process?
Of course, there are obstacles on our side, but we can overcome
them, as we did in the past. But the EU’s negative and obstructive
attitude has been encouraging the groups that oppose Turkey’s EU
membership. This serves as a factor of discouragement for the
implementation of the bills we pass. This also reinforces the
Turkish people’s perception that the EU is not inclined to accept
Turkey as a members, regardless of how it performs. However, the EU
is a comprehensive project. There must be popular support for the
membership process. But negative statements and attitudes are wearing
down this support.
It is being said that following Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
harsh words against Israel, the Jewish lobby in the US will withdraw
its support from Turkey with respect to the Armenian "genocide"
bill. Do you think that a new era has begun in Turkish-Israeli
relations?
This and other things are being said. Some say these things as
wishful thinking. The prime minister and the Turkish government
have not done anything against the Jewish nation or the Jewish
race. Such an attitude would not be accepted in our beliefs or our
culture. And our past is full of examples showing this. It said that
because of Israel’s recent attack on Gaza, about 1,300 people died,
5,000 people were wounded and about 50,000 people were left without
homes. The damage amounts to about $2 billion. Forty-two percent of
the 1,300 deaths were women and children. There were publications
and broadcasts around the world. International TV networks covered
the tragedy. Even Jewish intellectuals criticized it. We have never
entertained anti-Semitism. We have never had hostility against Jews
or the Israeli people, and we never will. Turkey is the only country
that can express this criticism and, at the same time, continue to
have dialogue with all sides. We attach importance to our relations
with Israel, and we intend to maintain them.
‘Ergenekon is a lawful investigation’
The Ergenekon investigation has become the most discussed investigation
in Turkey’s history. It is claimed that the ruling party is using
this investigation to suppress its rivals. How do you regard this
investigation?
Everyone should know this: This is a lawful investigation. But,
since its inception, there have been political discussions about the
trial. In particular, Republican People’s Party [CHP] leader Deniz
Baykal has been making very political comments about this purely legal
process. Baykal practiced law, and he knows well that it is illegal
to make such comments about an issue that is being investigated by
the judicial authorities. This is an offense under Article 288. The
prosecutors are supposed to launch an investigation under this article,
be it against Baykal or others. Unfortunately, no due care is being
paid to this. Everyone is talking about the rule of law, but they
readily violate it. If the rule of law is being sought, and if everyone
wants the Turkish republic to be governed by the rule of law as laid
out in its Constitution, then everyone must pay due respect to the
law. Failing to abide by the law and at the same time advocating the
rule of law is an unfortunate paradox. Even media organizations and
politicians suffer from this dilemma. Worst of it is that even some
judicial officials, too, fail to pay respect to rule of law. No one
is allowed to say anything about an ongoing trial. This is because we
do not know about the content of the case file. I personally do not
know it. How can I speak about something about which I know nothing?
In whatever form they advertise, these are all purely political
comments. If one makes political assessments about an ongoing legal
process, then law becomes a vehicle for daily politics.
In this way, you politicize law. This is what Turkey frequently
does. This question was asked to me during the news conference held
after the Cabinet meeting. Every time, I answered it by recalling the
legal rules. It is wrong to speak about that which you know nothing
about. In this way, you either declare people as innocent or guilty in
the beginning. This means that you establish legal judgments not based
on clear truth, but based on your biases, ideological obsessions or
political position. When the people detained are in their political
camp, they cry, "Why can you detain these people? How can you arrest
these people who have hold certain positions?" In other words, they
demand privileges for them. When the people detained are in the
rival camp, then they say, "They got their dessert. This was what
was expected."
This is not law. This is utterly wrong. You cannot rely on your
ideological obsessions or some abstract illusions in your mind
in pursuing your politics. This will complicate things for the
judiciary. A person who is detained or who is being investigated is
neither guilty nor innocent. We cannot know it. It is the court that
will decide about his case. Then, everyone must be patient. Such
comprehensive investigations cannot be easily completed in a short
time. Such investigations were conducted only during martial law
in Turkey. This investigation is the biggest and most comprehensive
investigation of the Turkish republic.
We must have utter confidence in the judicial process and wait for the
conclusion of the trial. The court may be erroneous in procedures or
as to the merits of the case. There are legal provisions to correct
these. There is also the Supreme Court of Appeals as an ultimate
authority of appeal. If there are errors in the case files, they will
eventually be reviewed by the Supreme Court of Appeals. People should
refrain from making assessments from their own political standpoints,
but be patient for the process to take its natural course. This
is wrong.
Recently, some people have argued that it is not an offense to
consider or plan a military coup as long as no attempt is made to
fulfill it. This is a recurring argument voiced by Mumtaz Soysal and
some other people. These arguments seem to be moves to acquit the
suspects. What do you think about it?
I do not want to talk much about it. Not only with respect
to the Ergenekon investigation, but also with regard to other
corruption cases, professional solidarity tends to outweigh legal
considerations. People tend to distort law for these members of
their own political camp. Legal rules are sacrificed to professional
solidarity. We have seen examples of it many times. It is my hope
that we will not see them in future. I can perfectly understand
solidarity among members of the same profession on purely humanitarian
considerations. One can pay a visit to a detained person. One can
visit even a convicted person; his conviction does not imply that one
should cut off ties with that person. In other words, a convicted
person is not cursed person. One can visit that person’s relatives
or spouse. You can perform visits after getting permission for
it. Indeed, laws specify who can visit whom, and one is supposed to
abide by laws. These are humanitarian considerations. You cannot raise
objections about them. Yet, if you go beyond this and put yourself
in place of the judiciary and start to accuse or penalize someone,
this will be wrong. This is a frequent practice in Turkey.
Professional solidarity is acceptable provided that it stays within
humanitarian limits. But if you frequently go out and issue statements
or hold press conferences, then one is inclined to ask whether laws
are just for the weak. Is this acceptable? This is wrong. Offenses
are committed by people, not by professions.
If you emphasize the title of the person who has committed a crime,
this will lead to suspension of law. Offenses are committed by
individuals, not by certain professions.
If justice is the basis of everything, then everyone must pay respect
to it. However, we tend to attach greater importance to our ideology
than law. We tend to be guided by our camps and our professional
biases. Soysal is not an expert on criminal law as he is specialized
in constitutional law. In legal terms, his arguments are not valid.
‘What happened before presidental elections?’
It seems that the military is involved not only in legal processes,
but also in the political process. A recently disclosed voice
recording reveals that former Chief of General Staff İsmail Hakkı
Karadayı warned former ANAVATAN leader Erkan Mumcu not to attend
the parliamentary session for electing the president.
There were illegalities and troubles during the presidential election,
and the parliamentary elections had to be held in July, earlier
than its normal schedule. As we have failed to solve this issue
through legal and constitutional methods, we have to refer it to
the nation for final settlement. During that process, we have gone
through a number of things. These will be clarified in time. Yet,
Turkey should now leave those days back in the past. All troubles
and issues are being closely monitored and eventually solved by the
nation. It will continue to settle them in future. There are about
50 million voters. Will they intimidate them?
The Constitutional Court canceled the lawful interception law, which
is also known as wiretapping bill. Will this lead to the cancellation
of the wiretapping methods used in the Ergenekon investigation.
The law was not canceled in its entirety. This law is an important
law. The way to protect freedoms in Turkey is to establish the
public order. When the public order is distorted, you cannot bring
freedom. If in a country you cannot establish public order under law,
and you cannot go out freely, then whether you have freedom to travel
or right to own property is unimportant. For this reason, public
order is the guarantee for freedoms. These two are not alternatives
to each other. They both have to coexist.
Today, offenses against the public order are being committed in
an organized manner. These surveillance technology and methods are
prerequisites for the fight against organized crimes.
By passing this law, we have laid the legal framework for these
methods. The Constitutional Court does not raise objections to this
point. It has only canceled the provisions concerning the appointment
of the people responsible for this work. After seeing the reasoned
decision, we will make arrangements. This bill has not been passed for
the Ergenekon investigation. Even individual crimes are being committed
in a collective manner. The Constitutional Court acknowledges the
raison d’etre of this bill. The wiretapping by the police is being
performed upon court order. I don’t think this will be a problem.
–Boundary_(ID_ptqQQd6qCN0kSB656/z7ew)–