EU Faults Turkey On Cyprus Trade, Showing Entry Risks

EU FAULTS TURKEY ON CYPRUS TRADE, SHOWING ENTRY RISKS
By Jonathan Stearns

Bloomberg
Sept 27 2006

Sept. 27 (Bloomberg) — The European Union criticized Turkey for
the second time in as many days for restricting trade with Cyprus,
underscoring the risk of a breakdown in talks on Turkish entry into
the EU.

The European Parliament today pressed Turkey, which occupies part of
EU member Cyprus, to lift a ban on Cypriot ships and airplanes.

Yesterday, EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn urged the Ankara
government to end the embargo as he prepares a Nov. 8 assessment of
Turkey’s bid for membership.

"The restrictions infringe the principle of the free movement of
goods," the Parliament said in a resolution approved in Strasbourg,
France. "A lack of progress in this regard will have serious
implications for the negotiation process and could even bring it to
a halt."

The warnings reflect EU anxieties about letting in Turkey, which would
become the first Muslim member and one of the bloc’s most populous
nations. Turkey’s occupation of the northern tier of Cyprus since a
1974 invasion and its refusal to recognize the Mediterranean island
republic add to the troubles.

The 25-nation EU began decade-long accession talks with Turkey last
October after Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government promised
to extend to Cyprus a free-trade accord with other EU members. The
government in Ankara has since linked this step to the end of a
European trade embargo against the Turkish- occupied part of Cyprus.

`No Bargaining’

"I hope Turkey understands that there is no bargaining on this,"
Camiel Eurlings, a Dutch member who steered the resolution through the
EU Parliament, said in an interview. "Turkey must do what it pledged."

Eurlings said he had the impression the Turkish government was heading
"toward a cliff" on this matter and was speeding up instead of trying
to alter its course. "I am very frustrated. I am worried," he said.

Cyprus joined the EU in May 2004 without the northern region because
voters in the Greek-speaking south rejected a United Nations-backed
unification plan. The Turkish-speaking north endorsed the plan,
prompting Ankara to blame the Cypriot government for the island’s
continuing division.

The EU Parliament said Turkey should bolster efforts to unite the
island through an "early withdrawal" from northern Cyprus of Turkish
soldiers numbering about 30,000.

Facilitating Talks

"The withdrawal of Turkish soldiers could facilitate the resumption
of substantive negotiations," the assembly said in its resolution,
which was approved by a vote of 429 to 71 with 125 abstentions.

The Parliament, whose resolution on Turkey is non-binding, acts in
these cases as a barometer of public opinion in the bloc. EU national
governments and the European Commission, the bloc’s executive arm in
Brussels, steer membership negotiations.

In February, EU governments approved a 139 million-euro ($176 million)
aid package for northern Cyprus while refusing Turkey’s demand for
an end to the EU embargo against the region.

In a concession to Turkey today, the Parliament scrapped from its
resolution a call to make Turkish "acknowledgement" of the alleged
genocide against Armenians in 1915 a "precondition" for EU membership.

The draft resolution from the Parliament’s foreign-affairs committee in
early September had included this demand, which the Turkish government
criticized at the time as being "far from objective."

Pourquoi La Turquie Veut Adherer, Par Abdullah Gul

POURQUOI LA TURQUIE VEUT ADHERER, PAR ABDULLAH GUL

Le Monde, France
26 septembre 2006 mardi

La perspective de rejoindre de plein droit l’Union europeenne est
pour nous un puissant stimulant. Nous pouvons de notre côte apporter
beaucoup a l’Europe, pour le bien de tous.

Depuis que la Turquie a pose sa candidature pour entrer dans l’Union
europeenne, elle n’a pas menage ses efforts en vue de remplir les
conditions fixees par les pays membres. Plus d’un tiers des articles de
notre Constitution ont ete modifies, de nombreuses mesures legales ou
administratives promulguees ; notre societe se modernise a un rythme
accelere. C’est la voie du progrès pour le peuple turc et celle qui
nous permettra d’aborder au mieux les differentes etapes du processus
de negociations où nous sommes desormais engages avec Bruxelles.

Certes, les obstacles ne manquent pas sur le chemin, tant du côte de
la Turquie (je ne minimise pas le travail qui nous reste a accomplir)
que de la part des pays europeens dont certains ne cachent pas leur
scepticisme, voire leur hostilite, touchant la candidature turque.

Face a de telles difficultes, il est legitime que l’on nous interroge :
" Pourquoi tenez-vous tellement a integrer l’Union europeenne au lieu
de vous contenter d’un accord douanier et d’un statut de partenaire
privilegie ? " D’aucuns se demandent meme si notre insistance
n’obeirait pas a des intentions peu avouables : ils ne sont pas loin
de soupconner la Turquie d’etre le cheval de Troie de telle ou telle
puissance !

Pour repondre a ces interrogations et tenter de clarifier le debat,
je voudrais preciser ici nos motivations.

D’abord, notre integration dans l’Union europeenne est, a un double
titre, l’aboutissement naturel de notre marche volontariste vers le
renouveau : comme consequence logique de notre vocation europeenne
seculaire, d’une part ; comme motivation puissante des changements que
nous conduisons, d’autre part. La dimension europeenne de mon pays a
de profondes racines historiques, que l’on ignore trop souvent. C’est
dès 1495 que la Turquie envoie son premier representant diplomatique
en France. Celle-ci, de son côte, inaugure au XVIe siècle a Istanbul
sa première representation diplomatique dans un pays etranger. Depuis,
les influences et relations mutuelles n’ont cesse de se developper,
en meme temps que notre peuple participait a l’histoire de l’Europe. Au
reste, la Turquie figure parmi les pays fondateurs ou les plus anciens
membres d’organisations transatlantiques ou europeennes telles que
l’OTAN, le Conseil de l’Europe ou l’OSCE.

Ensuite, l’adhesion a l’UE est l’assurance d’une democratie plus forte
et plus stable, d’une economie plus saine, d’une protection sociale
plus equitable, et d’un developpement durable. C’est aussi un gage de
perennisation de la paix. Sans doute n’est-il pas impossible de remplir
ces objectifs en dehors de l’Union, mais il n’en reste pas moins que
notre volonte d’en devenir membre traduit avant tout un choix politique
et philosophique en faveur des ideaux et des principes qui la fondent.

Reciproquement, l’integration de mon pays fera beneficier pleinement
l’Europe de nos atouts considerables, grâce auxquels celle-ci sera
en bien meilleure position pour s’imposer face a la concurrence
mondiale. Notre population jeune, cultivee, ouverte, la dynamique de
notre societe, la vigueur de son economie et son adaptabilite face aux
defis de la mondialisation sont souvent citees comme les principaux
atouts de la candidature turque. Un autre atout majeur est celui de
la contribution de la Turquie a la securite energetique de l’Europe,
avec le rôle central qui dorenavant lui incombe en ce secteur,
notamment a travers la realisation de l’oleoduc Bakou-Tbilissi-Ceyhan.

A ces facteurs socio-economiques, il convient d’ajouter l’apport
geostrategique de la Turquie, le lien privilegie qu’elle etablit
entre l’Asie centrale et l’ouest de l’Europe. La convergence de vues
est remarquable entre les politiques etrangères turque et francaise.

Les recents evenements au Proche-Orient ont mis encore une fois en
evidence la similitude de nos analyses s’agissant des principales
questions internationales. En ce domaine, dans la quasi-totalite des
cas (94 % exactement), la Turquie agit conformement aux orientations
de politique etrangère et de securite commune de l’Union.

Independamment du processus d’adhesion, la Turquie a dès a present
participe aux operations militaires conduites par l’UE dans un large
espace geographique allant des Balkans a la Republique democratique
du Congo.

Enfin, de nombreux pays, confrontes a la mondialisation, cherchent a
s’unir en creant de grandes zones economiques qui tendent a se doter
d’instances plus ou moins formalisees de coordination politique.

L’Europe en a ete le modèle, imite mais jamais egale, notamment en
Amerique et en Asie. Il est vrai que la Turquie est un grand pays,
dont le developpement et la croissance sont extremement rapides :
mais nous avons la volonte, comme d’autres nations, de nous inserer
dans un ensemble plus large. " Eh bien, vous avez le choix ",
dira-t-on. Pour nous, cependant, il n’en est qu’un qui vaille :
c’est a l’Union europeenne que nous souhaitons ardemment adherer.

J’espère que ces quelques reflexions auront mieux fait comprendre les
raisons de notre aspiration a rejoindre l’Union. Elles expliquent
qu’il n’y ait pas, pour la Turquie, d’autre option qu’une adhesion
plenière. A ce titre, notre actuelle union douanière avec l’UE n’est,
comme le precise l’accord qui nous lie, qu’une etape preliminaire
de notre adhesion : elle ne saurait en tenir lieu, pas plus qu’un
" partenariat privilegie " que personne, d’ailleurs, ne parvient
a definir. Nous voulons participer pleinement au projet commun. La
Turquie est le seul pays a avoir realise une union douanière avec
l’Europe sans en devenir membre. Les contraintes qui en resultent pour
notre peuple ne seraient guère tolerables pour lui sans la perspective
de voir notre pays devenir membre a part entière.

Je n’ignore pas que des differences d’analyses subsistent sur certains
dossiers : c’est le cas, notamment, de la question chypriote. La
comme ailleurs, nous devons pouvoir nous entendre sur les solutions
les plus conformes aux valeurs fondatrices de l’Union.

Pour ce qui concerne la situation a Chypre, aujourd’hui divisee
entre une partie chypriote grecque (membre de l’Union europeenne)
et une partie chypriote turque (exclue de l’Union), notre vision
est celle d’un axe de cooperation, au sein de l’UE, entre la Grèce,
la Turquie et un Etat de Chypre reunifie. Dans cette perspective,
nous continuons de soutenir les efforts du secretaire general des
Nations unies tendant a apporter un règlement global au problème.

J’observe qu’un autre sujet revient souvent dans les debats concernant
la Turquie : la question armenienne. Pour degager enfin les principes
d’une reconciliation sur un conflit de memoires entre deux peuples
qui ont partage près de dix siècles de vie commune en harmonie,
notre gouvernement propose, avec l’appui unanime du Parlement turc,
de creer une commission mixte d’historiens turcs et armeniens dont
les travaux seront ouverts aux contributions des historiens de pays
tiers qui le souhaiteraient. L’objectif de cette commission sera
de faire toute la lumière, d’une facon objective et impartiale, sur
les evenements tragiques de 1915, causes de tant de souffrances pour
les Armeniens et les Turcs. Nous nous engageons d’avance a accepter
les conclusions des experts et a y repondre par des initiatives
appropriees. Le respect scrupuleux de l’histoire est la condition
d’un authentique exercice du devoir de memoire.

La Turquie, quant a elle, n’epargnera rien pour faciliter une
juste resolution des problèmes qui demeurent sur la voie de son
entree dans l’Union. J’ai dit les raisons de fond et les sentiments
qui nous attachent a ce projet. Contrairement a ce que craignent
certains, notre integration a l’Europe ne pourra que redynamiser sa
construction politique, tant nous sommes attaches a ce qu’elle puisse
avoir l’influence qu’elle merite dans les affaires du monde.

J’appelle la France, qui jouit d’une solide base historique, culturelle
et economique dans notre pays, a soutenir la realisation de cette
promesse d’avenir : l’adhesion de la Turquie a l’Union europeenne.

Abdullah Gul

Vice-premier ministreet ministre des affaires etrangères de Turquie.

–Boundary_(ID_bFwMvUa50v94a5epZsmnfw)–

On this Day – Sept 25

ON THIS DAY – SEPT 25

CNN.com
September 25, 2006 Monday 6:57 AM EST

1924: Greece announces the deportation of 50,000 Armenians.

1564: Maximillian II becomes emperor of the Holy Roman Empire.

1587: Japanese strong-man Hideyoshi bans Christianity in Japan and
orders all Christians to leave.

1593: France’s King Henry IV converts from Protestantism to Roman
Catholicism.

1729: North Carolina becomes a royal colony.

1799: On his way back from Syria, Napoleon Bonaparte defeats the
Ottomans at Aboukir, Egypt.

1822: Gen. Agustin de Iturbide is crowned Agustin I, 1st emperor
of Mexico.

1845: China grants Belgium equal trading rights with Britain, France
and the U.S.

1860: The 1st US intercollegiate billiard match is between Harvard
and Yale.

1867: President Andrew Johnson signs an act creating the territory
of Wyoming.

1909: The first honeymoon in a balloon.

1924: Greece announces the deportation of 50,000 Armenians.

1943 Benito Mussolini is dismissed as premier of Italy by King Victor
Emmanuel III and placed under arrest. Mussolini is later rescued by
the Nazis and re-asserts his authority.

1946: The U.S. detonates a second atomic bomb at Bikini Atoll in the
Pacific in the first underwater test of the device.

1952: Puerto Rico becomes a self-governing commonwealth of the U.S.

1953: A truce ends the Korean War.

1964: The Beatles’ "A Hard Day’s Night" album goes No. 1 in the U.S.

and stays No. 1 for 14 weeks.

1965: Folk-rock begins when Bob Dylan uses electricity at the Newport
Folk Festival.

1981: Voyager 2 encounters Saturn.

1997: In India Kocheril Raman Narayannan (1920-2005) is sworn in
as president, becoming the first member of the "untouchable" Dalits
caste to do so.

2001: India’s bandit queen, Phoolan Devi, is killed by masked gunmen
in New Delhi. She had led a revolt against the abuse of low-class
women and won a seat in parliament.

2005: Intel announces plans to build a $3 billion computer
microprocessor fabrication plant in Arizona.

BAKU: Azerbaijani President Leaves for Germany

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Sept 22 2006

Azerbaijani President Leaves for Germany

AssA-Irada 22/09/2006 23:36

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev will leave for Berlin, Germany
on Friday. During the two-day visit, he is expected to attend the
International Bertelsmann Forum focusing on political and economic
prospects in Europe, the German embassy in Baku told AssA-Irada.

Aliyev will also hold a tete-a-tete meeting with the German
Chancellor Angela Merkel to discuss issues of cooperation between
the two countries. The president is also scheduled to meet Georgian
parliament speaker Nino Burchanadze as well as other leaders and
heads of government.

The Armenia-Azerbaijan Upper (Nagorno) Garabagh conflict will be
among the issues to be discussed. A document between Azerbaijan and
the European Union is to be signed during the visit as well.

Forums of this kind are organized by Carl Bertelsmann Foundation once
in two years in an effort to hold dialogue on the future of Europe
among political, economic and cultural circles and media outlets. The
last such event, "European alternatives – changes and prospects for
expanding Europe", was held in Berlin in 2004 and drew over 30 leaders
and prime ministers, parliament speakers and ministers from 22 European
states, as well as representatives of the United States and Israel.

President: reforms of RA agrarian sector create serious precondition

PRESIDENT: REFORMS OF RA AGRARIAN SECTOR CREATE SERIOUS PRECONDITIONS
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF COUNTRY’S RURAL COMMUNITIES

Arka News Agency, Armenia
Sept 22 2006

YEREVAN, September 22. /ARKA/. Reforms, effected in the agrarian
sector of Armenia, create serious preconditions for the development
of the country’s rural communities, according to the message of the RA
President Robert Kocharyan, read today at the opening ceremony of the
"Armagroforum" second international conference.

At the same time Kocharyan pointed out in his message that there’re
a number of problems, salvation of which was possible only within
the framework of international cooperation.

He also welcomed the organization of the conference in Armenia.

"Two years have passed since the first Armagroforum was held,
and during this period of time Armenia has undergone many positive
changes. However the growth of the international integration of the
agricultural sphere, strengthening the power of the agroprocessing
system, development of the international trade, modernization of the
agricultural facilities – these are the timely issues, which must be
discussed and solved during the forum", Kocharyan emphasized.

Armagroforum second international conference launched has in Yerevan
today and will last till September 23. Delegates from 35 countries
of the world, namely from Russia, USA, France, Italy and a number of
CIS countries take part in the conference. S.P.–0– S

"Deputy Head of the State Tax Committee is an Obstacle in the Inves

"DEPUTY HEAD OF THE STATE TAX COMMITTEE IS AN OBSTACLE IN THE INVESTMENT FIELD"

A1+
[05:22 pm] 22 September, 2006

Honorary President of "Sil" group, NA deputy Khachatour Suqiasyan
spoke about the state system in "Mirror" club today. Speaking about
the possibilities of Armenian businessmen and the investments of
the Armenians of the Diaspora he said that Gagik Khachatryan, the
deputy head of the State Tax Committee, is an obvious obstacle in
the investment field.

According to Khachatour Suqiasyan, Gagik Khachatryan has 11 business
organizations. And if the deputy head of the State Tax Committee
has more than ten organizations, moreover, he imports good, he can’t
but hinder other importers. In this case, according to the deputy,
we must not accept increase of foreign investments.

"Everyone knows that this or that official imports certain goods
himself and owns certain shops. If someone wants to import the same
goods, it’s clear that his business is doomed to failure", Khachatour
Suqiasyan said.

Heritage Gate?: Political Party Demands President Be Questioned

ArmeniaNow.com-September 8, 2006

HERITAGE GATE?: POLITICAL PARTY DEMANDS PRESIDENT BE QUESTIONED

Gayane Lazarian
ArmeniaNow reporter

The Heritage political party held a press conference this week in which
it demanded that the Prosecutor General of Armenia question President
Robert Kocharyan, concerning allegations of a "mini-Watergate".

Party founder and former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Raffi
Hovannisian, made reference to the famous US scandal that ended the
presidency of Richard Nixon. He equated it to actions taken against
the Heritage party. The party alleges that information has been stolen,
and that the President’s office knew about it.

The background:

On March 4, Heritage party’s offices were shut down by the government,
which claimed the party no longer had a right to operate from space
provided at the Paronian Theater.

The party offices were sealed until May 29, while the party filed
action that eventually led to getting the offices back.

Upon regaining its facilities, Heritage staff learned that one of its
computers had been tampered with, during the period that the office
was supposed to have remained sealed. It filed a complaint with the
Kentron Division of Yerevan Police, demanding an investigation.

On August 30, the police returned a decision saying there was no
grounds for an investigation.

A lawyer for the party, Zaruhi Postanjyan, however, says experts at the
National Bureau of Examination at the National Academy of Sciences,
has shown the computer had been switched on for 22-24 minutes during
the night of March 8. The examination also found that a different
monitor and a memory device had been connected during that time.

"This is a mini-Watergate scandal being repeated in Armenia," said
the party’s fiery founder. "In a country with a declared rule of law
they close one’s office in the night without any court decision, they
penetrate into the office in the night four days after the closing,
switch on the computer there and get the secret information about
the party and its activists."

Hovannisian, among the strongest and most persistent of Kocharyan
adversaries, says the Office of the President is aware of the spying
on his party and that theft has been committed.

Attorney Postanjyan alleges that the police were negligent.

"The results of the examination are enough to bring a case into
action," she says. "However, ignoring the law and justice, law
enforcers refuse to hold a relevant investigation referring instead
to the lack of the corpus delicti," says Postanjyan.

Hovannisian believes that, in addition to other documents, a list
of party activists was stolen, with the intention to intimidate
sympathizers.

"I hope the national Security Service has no connection to all of this,
because the information was so badly stolen, that I wouldn’t like
to learn the Service operates so poorly," Hovannisian sarcastically
stated. "I am confident the incident was a response to our recent
civil activity taking place in an atmosphere of fear."

The leader of the party complained that appeals by the party have
been denied at every level of the justice system.

During the press conference, he also commented on Wednesday’s murder
of the head of Armenia’s "tax police".

"It reflects the illness of our authorities, our state and our
society," Hovannisian said. "We can keep speaking about law and
democracy, but unless everyone – whether a President or an ordinary
citizen – is equal before the law in this country, this kind of things
will continue to happen."

Nagorno Karabakh Parliament deputy speaker: "Adoption of constitutio

REGNUM
September 21, 2006September 21, 2006

Nagorno Karabakh Parliament deputy speaker: "Adoption of constitution
is important step on the path to integration"

"Our party has its own approaches to the draft constitution,
submitted for parliamentary discussion. We believe that features of
the Karabakh state system should be recorded in the constitution. As
a member of state constitutional commission, I tabled a number of
motions; majority of them were accepted at a commission session,"
Nagorno Karabakh National Assembly Deputy Speaker, Free Homeland
Party co-Chair Rudik Usnunts is quoted by a REGNUM correspondent as
stating in interview to Karabakh Demo public newspaper.

According to him, adoption of the constitution will contribute to
increasing efficiency activity of all three power branches. The latter
will contribute to strengthening democratic foundations in the country.

According to the draft constitution, prime minister will be appointed
by country’s president after consultations with the National Assembly
chairman and parliamentary factions’ leaders. "We believe that prime
minister should be appointed by the parliament; we will insist on
the recoding it in the constitution.

>>From our point of view, it will become a step to increasing role
and responsibility of parliament," Rudik Usnunts stressed.

According to the NKR parliament deputy speaker, the ‘neither war
nor peace’ state does not prevent country from having a progressive
constitution, adoption of which "will become considerable step on the
path to country’s integration into civilized world and international
recognition." "Artsakh people, who have won on battle field, should
live worth life; constitution should become legal guarantor of it,"
Radik Usnunts pointed out.

ANKARA: Who is the Enemy of the US in Turkey? by Sedat Laciner

Who is the Enemy of the US in Turkey?
By Sedat Laciner

Journal of Turkish Weekly
21 September 2006

Recently, there is an inflation of claims in Turkey arguing that
hatred against the US is surging and so-called anti-Semitism is on the
peak. In particular, after the Iraq War in 2003, some circles in the
US claim that Turkey is ruled by an Islamist government, and that the
government supports anti-American and anti-Israeli groups. According
to this view, Turkey is an obstacle in the implementation of the
American and Israeli policies in the Middle East. There are those
who maintain that the current government should be toppled in order
to overcome this situation.

First of all, one must admit that there has recently been a notable
reaction particularly in Turkey against the American and Israeli
policies. In the surveys conducted by our organization, ISRO (USAK),
in March 2005, we found the emergence of a reaction against the US and
Israel. The study found that 91 % of the Turkish public did not approve
the policies of US President George W. Bush. Those who support Bush’s
policies was only 0,5 %. In the USAK’s friend-enemy perception survey,
the US and Israel got the lowest ranking. However, these statistics
don’t imply that Turkish people are exception in global trends. The
US’ policies on Iraq and global terrorism are largely disapproved
by the world as well. Bush’s policies are a subject of mockery even
in the US. The same survey also suggests that Turkish people don’t
hate the US or Americans, and reactions are conjectural as a result
of current American policies. For example, 74 % of the respondents
still see the US as an ally of Turkey.

Those who state they hated the US were only 4 %. There is a fact that
Turks dislike Bush but appreciate Clinton very much. Same is true
for Israel. Turkey is one of the countries where anti-Semitism has no
historical roots. Turks and Turkey are against the Israeli policies,
but not Israel. In this sense, Turkey isn’t more anti-Israeli than
any other country in the globe.

So, why is there an increasing concern in the US that Turkey is going
anti-American? Why are some people trying to give the impression that
Turkey has become an al-Qaeda base?

There are various reasons for that:

The Turkish government is blamed for the rejection of the proposal in
March 1, 2003 (tezkere), which would have allowed the US troops to use
Turkish territory for military passage to Iraq. Some neo-cons in the
US cannot accept this result. They think that they were betrayed by
Turkey. The US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is the most prominent
person in this group.

Rumsfeld has blamed the inability to gain permission to invade Iraq
through Turkey for the power of the insurgency that the US now
faces. (1) For Rumsfeld, had Turkey given the permission, the US
wouldn’t have suffered this many of fatalities and Iraq would have
been a totally different country. Rumsfeld may be right on that
point in some degree. However, it can be seen that the US lacked
proper understanding of Turkey’s importance before the March 1
voting. Before the war, the US thought that Turkey would definitely
approve the proposal, and in a way, confused Turkish Assembly with
the other ones in the Middle East.

Moreover, the approval became much less likely because of the
US’ indifferent attitude. They treated the subject like a horse
trading. They were so arrogant in very minor topics that they
attracted great negative reaction from the Turkish public. Secondly,
it wouldn’t be fair to blame the government for the rejection of the
proposal in the Assembly. It is true that the government did some
small mistakes. However, the Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan still says that
"the proposal should have been approved". The government did its best
to get the approval from the Parliament.

As a matter of fact, all of those who voted for the approval were the
governing AKP’s (Justice and Development Party) MPs, who were blamed
for being "Islamist" and anti-American. In addition, the proposal
was rejected with only a few vote-margin.

Besides, those who voted affirmative were more than those who voted
negative, but there was no simple majority due to abstentions. As
opposed to the general belief, it is the traditional leftist party,
CHP (Republican People’s Party), which voted "no" collectively,
that caused the proposal to be rejected.

Even today, the party leader Deniz Baykal tells this story as one of
the party’s biggest successes. Another reason of rejection was the
Army’s implicit message a day before the voting that the result was
not very important for itself. The Turkish Army, expressing its views
in almost every case, did not make any statement in such a crucial
matter. In the National Security Council meeting which was held a day
before the voting, the Army’s silence on the issue was perceived as
the Army was against the approval.

Some right-wing Jewish groups in the US see AKP and al-Qaeda
identical. These groups characterize governing AKP as "Islamist",
and claim that Turkey is leaning towards Islamism at the expense
of Westernism.

However, AKP leadership totally rejects "Islamism" idea. The AKP leader
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, with an inspiration from Christian Democrats,
defines his party as Muslim Democrat. One can also say that AKP,
like the early years of ANAP (Motherland Party), is an umbrella party
embodying many different groups, including liberals and leftists. But
claiming that Turkey has become an Islamist state during the AKP
rule is a quiet exaggerated assessment. During this period, Turkey
has achieved the most notable reforms in its history in the fields
of democratization and Westernization, also thanks to the EU process.

Negotiations for full membership have begun with the EU, and the
Turkish economy has achieved a dramatic growth in integration with
the Western economies during this period ironically called by some
Islamist.

The third important reason is the claim that Turkey has shifted
towards an anti-Israeli posture with the AKP government. It is true
that the PM Erdogan has harshly criticized Israel. In one of his
speeches, Erdogan went as far as asserting that Israel has had some
conducts which might be termed as "state terrorism". However, this
firm attitude against Israel is not peculiar to AKP’s Erdogan. His
predecessor Bulent Ecevit, a leftist politician, also blamed Israel
for committing "genocide" against the Palestinians. Similarly, the
leftist opposition party CHP’s leader Deniz Baykal also makes very
harsh statements criticizing Israel. The far leftist and rightist
parties in Turkey all also criticize Israel sharply. In other words,
we cannot say that the Turco-Israeli relations have deteriorated
during the AKP government. On the contrary, the Israeli Ambassador to
Ankara, Pinhas Avivi, has stated that the good relations between the
two countries have reached its peak in history during the current
Turkish government. Delivering a speech at ISRO (USAK) on September
6, 2006, the Ambassador said that the economic relations between two
countries have for the first time passed $10 billion and described the
relations as "strategic". In other words, the relations are getting
stronger and stronger regardless of the discourses. In this context,
one should remember that it was the Turkish leftists which opposed
most outspokenly to the Galataport investment project in Istanbul
by the Israeli businessman Ofer, and it was leftist CHP which
initiated campaigns to cancel this deal. On the other hand, it is
interesting to see that Prime Minister Erdogan, who was accused of
being "Islamist", warned the left-wing parties "not to act like the
economic anti-Semitics".

The fourth, and maybe the most important, reason is the complaints
to the US from Turkey. Those who cannot win the elections or who
doesn’t trust his personal or institutional influence in Turkey think
that the road to power passes through the US. For this reason, many
politicians and bureaucrats (civilian or not) have recently visited
the US. During these visits, the most prominent argument of the
groups opposing AKP government was that there was a polarization of
Islamists vs. secularists in Turkey. Stressing that this government
was "Islamist" and "anti-Western", these opposition groups asked for
American support to topple the government. The visitors from Turkey not
only talked to officials but also paid visits to the ethnic-religious
and political lobbies to share their views. The effects of these
groups perhaps are much more influential than anything else in the
emergence of an anti-Turkish atmosphere in the US.

The Turkey experts of Turkish origin in the US: Some of the Turkey
experts of Turkish origin, who have difficulty in maintaining their
posts or maintaining their posts with some preconditions, are trying
to retain their posts by giving an impression in the US that there is
a strong polarization in Turkey. The extension of their contracts is
conditioned to defend certain views, and these contracts are usually
offered by groups which see Turkey as we defined above. In addition,
the institutions in the US only want to hear what they want to hear
and ignore criticisms of the US, and this keeps the Turkey experts
under grave pressure. Because of this, many "experts" have to defend
the views which they don’t approve just to maintain their projects and
grants. Some other Turkish experts, who are less in number, present
their personal ideological positions as the views reflecting Turkey.

Who is the Enemy of the US in Turkey?

It is clear for many that there has been a strong anti-Americanism
in Turkey since the World War II. The US Congress’ support to the
Armenian radicals and also its support of the Greek side in the Cyprus
issue are some of the reasons for the Turkish dislike of the US.

The most important reason undermining the image of the US in
Turkey was the arms embargo imposed on Turkey in the 1970s with
the influence of the Greek lobby in the US. In the following years,
the PKK terror and the Kurdish issue in Turkey have been the main
problems in Turco-American relations. It is noteworthy to see that
it has been the Jewish lobby which defended Turkish interests in the
Congress during this period. Another striking point is that, contrary
to the general belief in the West, the basis of anti -Americanism in
Turkey is not Islamist movements, but secular leftist ideologies. The
anti-Americanism and -Westernism in Turkey is, generally, a leftist
movement. What is more, one can even say that being a leftist, being
anti-Israeli and anti-American are almost synonymous.

For example, the demonstrations protesting the arrival of the US
6th Fleet in Turkey in the 1960s has been one of the legends of the
Turkish left. On the other hand, Turkish right-wing has always been
willing to improve the relations with the US. As a matter of fact,
it is not coincidence to see that the most noticeable improvements
in relations with the US have taken place during the conservative
rightist governments (Menderes, Demirel, Ozal etc.) in Turkey.

Even the far rightist groups such as Islamists and nationalists have
never been as critical as the leftists about the US. Both groups
criticize the US and Israeli policies as a populist method to draw
support from the masses during election campaigns.

However, when any of these parties were in power, they refrained
from any action which could harm the relations. Furthermore, the
Islamist governments, in their coalition governments, improved
relations with the US and Israel just because they were concerned
with secular reactions to their political leanings. It is striking
to note that the most significant security agreement between Israel
and Turkey was signed by the government of Necmettin Erbakan, known
to be an Islamist, in 1996.

However, anti-American and anti-Israeli stand has been an important
part of CHP, the centrist and moderate leftist party. Many MPs in
CHP take the issue back to the Turkish War of Salvation (1919-1922)
and claim that the West still wants to divide Turkey. For CHP,
the PKK is supported by the Western powers, and there is a Western
bloc against Turkey in Cyprus and Armenian problems. CHP also sees
the US’ Middle East policies as conspiracies to divide Turkey. CHP
opposes not only political liberalism, but also economic one, and it
has been the political party which resists privatization the most. In
particular, the sale of Turkish state companies to Israel and the US is
unacceptable to CHP. Its strong opposition to the investments of Ofer,
an Israeli businessman, in Turkey and its campaign to prevent these
investments are indications of CHP’s posture on this issue. Not only
CHP, but DSP, another left-wing party, is also very critical of the US
and Israel. The campaign "no sale of Turkish property to foreigners"
initiated by Rahsan Ecevit, one of the most influential figures of the
party, is the peak of distrust against Israel and the West. According
to Ecevit, Israeli citizens are buying large areas of land from the
southeast of Turkey and this will be a process which will eventually
lead to the division of Turkey.

The anti-Americanism is much more sharper in far leftist groups,
and this may turn into terrorist activities as in the case of DHKP-C
(The Salvation Party-Front of Revolutionary People). The far leftist
Worker Party, led by Dogu Perincek, is quiet sure that the US and
Israel wants to divide Turkey. Perincek strictly opposes privatization,
liberal economy, Turkey’s NATO membership, its cooperation with the
US and Israel, and even sees all of these as treason.

For some groups in the US, the Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer
acts as a balance against the so-called Islamist government in its
anti-Israeli and -Western policies. First of all, the MPs of Erbakan’s
Islamist party gave full support to Sezer’s election in 2000.

So to say, Sezer was elected thanks to the votes of the "Islamist
MPs". It is true that Sezer is a fanatic secular, and his radical
stand against Islamism is evident. However, it is impossible to
say that President Sezer is pro-Israeli and -Western, and that he
counterweighs Erdogan on this issue. In fact, Sezer’s anti-Westernism
is incomparably stronger than that of Erdogan’s. His close relationship
with the Syrian President Beshar al-Assad, his views that Turkey should
establish regional alliances and should improve relations with Iran and
Russia instead of the US and the EU indicate that he is closer to the
"ulusalcilar" (leftist-nationalists). Sezer’s skepticism towards the
West is so strong that he has serious reservations regarding Turkey’s
full membership process in the EU. His opposition to privatization
and market economy are also noteworthy.

In 2005, he insisted to visit Syria challenging the US’ open
warnings. In brief, one cannot say that President Sezer is a
pro-Israeli and -American. In this sense, Erdogan’s government is
closer to the US, the EU and Israel than Sezer is.

Though less in number, another voiceful group is "ulusalcilar"
(leftist-nationalists). This group, which sometimes cooperate with the
right-wing nationalists, is perhaps the forerunner of opposition to
the US and Israel. This group is anti-Israeli and hostility against
the US is at the center of their policies. They cannot even get 1%
of the votes in the elections, yet they are still influential to some
extent on the President and some media companies.

Finally, the Turkish Army, claimed to be a balancer against
the current government, has no obvious anti- or pro-Western
attitude. Traditionally, the Turkish Army sees the future of Turkey
in the West. However, this affiliation can be defined as locating
Turkey in the West despite the West, i.e., it is based on never
fully trusting the West. Regarding Israel, it is seen that there is
a considerable distrust against Israel within the Army and this has
been growing recently.

Many military officers think that the US and Israel plan to
strengthen PKK and found a Kurdish state in North Iraq. In addition,
the anti-imperialist thoughts are still strong within the Army, which
originate from the Turkish War of Salvation. The most important reason
for Turkey’s ‘passivity’ to cooperate with the US during the Iraq
War has been the Army’s indetermination or skepticism. Had the Army
shown its willingness in favor of the proposal to involve in Iraq War,
the proposal would definitely have been approved in the Turkish Grand
National Assembly (TBMM). The Army’s unwillingness to send troops to
Lebanon was also observed by many circles. It is also quiet meaningful
to see that the Chief of General Staff, Gen. Yasar Buyukanit, rejected
at once the NATO’s request to send more troops to Afghanistan, without
even consulting to the government. In the Gulf War in 1991, the Army
also strongly opposed the decision of President Turgut Ozal to act
together with the US. The then-Chief of General Staff, Necip Torumtay,
did not want to take side with the US in Iraq in a moment when almost
the entire world was acting together with the US. Eventually, the
Chief of General Staff had to resign due to the disagreement.

To sum up, we must admit that the anti-American sentiments in Turkey
have been on the rise. However, this trend is not in contrast with the
world. The general tendency in Turkey is quiet similar to that in, say,
France, Germany or Egypt. In addition, it is not possible to define
the current government as Islamist or anti-Western. Furthermore,
the AKP government even has had no serious opposition in any of the
decisions concerning Israel or the US. The government every time
voted in favor of the policies adopted by the US and Israel. Hence,
it can be said that there is a significant illusion and manipulation
in the US towards Turkey.

21 September 2006

Trns. by Noyan OZKAYA; USAK

OSCE Minsk Group Best Way Of Karabakh Settlement – Armenia

OSCE MINSK GROUP BEST WAY OF KARABAKH SETTLEMENT – ARMENIA
Tigran Liloyan

ITAR-TASS News Agency
September 19, 2006 Tuesday 01:20 PM EST

The OSCE Minsk Group is the acceptable and today’s best way of settling
the Karabakh conflict for Armenia, Foreign Ministry representative
Vladimir Karapetian said on Tuesday.

"If the issue is referred to other agencies, including the UN,
Karabakh will have to take part in the negotiations," he said.

"Azerbaijan is playing a dangerous game, as it is trying to receive
dividends at other organizations, whose member countries do not have
profound information or knowledge of Karabakh."

"Armenia is very thorough about the negotiations, and expects
Azerbaijan to do the same," he said. "We have several times voiced
our positive attitude to the latest proposals by the OSCE Minsk Group
cochairmen, and we still hope to continue the negotiations."