Category: News

Press and Information Office, Occupied Northern Cyprus
Dec 17 2004
Cyprus PIO: Turkish Press and Other Media – 12/16/2004
[01] The Turkish Prime Minister arrived in Brussels.
[02] The Turkish Foreign Minister left for Brussels.
[03] The European Parliament calls for accession talks with Turkey.
[04] HURRIYET highlights the European Parliament decision on Turkey.
[05] Former Turkish Ambassador and CNN-TURK commentator Yalim Eralp:
“It is possible to establish a provisional solution government”.
[06] Turkish Cypriot newspaper speaks of a possible Cyprus summit in
Brussels in view of Annan´s presence.
[07] Mr Talat said that the Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas will
start contacts with the political party leaders for the “election”
date.
[08] An opinion poll conducted in the occupied areas shows the
Republican Turkish Party in the lead with 31%.
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
[09] Columnist in STAR newspaper argues that Turkey intends to
exploit possible resumption of Cyprus talks to avoid signing the
protocol it will commit itself to sign during the EU Summit.
——————————————————————————–
[A] NEWS ITEMS
[01] The Turkish Prime Minister arrived in Brussels
Ankara Anatolia news agency (15.12.04) reported that the Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrived in Brussels on Wednesday.
He will hold meetings in Brussels prior to EU Summit on December
17th.
Turkish State Minister Besir Atalay, Finance Minister Kemal Unakitan,
several bureaucrats and deputies are accompanying Erdogan.
”We are hopeful,” Erdogan said upon arrival regarding the decision
of EU leaders whether to open entry talks with Turkey at their summit
on Friday.
Upon questions of reporters, Erdogan said: “We are pleased with the
recommendatory decision of the European Parliament today. I am
interested in the result not the content. The decision of the
European Parliament is very meaningful.”
When asked what his expectation from French President Jacques Chirac
was, Erdogan said: ‘W will discuss it.”
[02] The Turkish Foreign Minister left for Brussels
Istanbul NTV television (15.12.04) broadcast that Foreign Minister
Abdullah Gul made a statement at Ankara’s Esenboga Airport before
leaving for Brussels to attend the EU summit. He reiterated that
Turkey expects the 17 December summit to reach a decision to start
full membership negotiations. Expressing the belief that Turkey
fulfilled its task in this regard, Gul said that Ankara hopes that
the EU leaders, in turn, will remain loyal to the documents they have
already signed and reach a decision to start the accession
negotiations during the course of 2005.
Gul said that the mutual demands and adjustments will continue until
the last minute during the summit. Asked about the conditions that
would compel Turkey to abandon the discussions, Gul said: The full
membership goal should be open and clear, and a date that will not
require another meeting should emerge from the summit.
There are certain matters that run counter to the EU acquis, and
these are not legitimate, Gul noted, and pointed to the permanent
derogations in this context. Gul concluded by expressing the hope
that a final compromise will be reached at the summit.
[03] The European Parliament calls for accession talks with Turkey
Ankara Anatolia news agency (15.12.04) reported from Strasbourg that
the European Parliament on Wednesday adopted a resolution calling for
the start of Turkey´s accession talks ”without undue delay”.
The European Parliament, meeting in Strasbourg, France, voted by 407
in favour to 262, against with 29 abstentions to pass the resolution.
This resolution is nonbinding, but important as it reflected the view
of the European Parliament prior to the EU-Brussels summit, which is
of historic importance for Turkey.
Socialist, Liberal, Green parliamentarians and British, Spanish and
Italian parliamentarians of the Christian Democrat group voted in
favour of Turkey.
The report, prepared by Dutch Parliamentarian Camiel Eurlings and a
recommendatory decision, urged for ”giving priority to the
implementation of the political criteria at the beginning of
negotiations.”
The recommendatory decision called on the Turkish parliament to
approve six legal amendments, which the European Commission stated in
the progress report, and proposed ”putting into force the political
dialogue mechanism about the close monitoring process and envisaging
suspension of negotiations by the European Commission when
necessary.”
[04] HURRIYET highlights the European Parliament decision on Turkey
Istanbul HURRIYET (Internet version, 15.12.04) publishes the
following report from Strasbourg under the title: “EP rejects giving
privileged partnership to Turkey”:
“The European Parliament [EP] has rejected motions for Turkey to be
given a special status, for its membership to be rejected, and for
the recognition of Turkey’s “Armenian Genocide”. The EP did adopt a
motion for full membership negotiations to be taken up with Turkey
without delay.
The EP passed the resolution recommending the initiation of full
membership negotiations with Turkey by a vote of 407 in favour and
262 opposed.
The reforms that have been carried out in Turkey were praised in the
advisory resolution, and it was stated that “The negotiations are the
starting point of a lengthy process, which by its nature is
open-ended and does not necessarily entail the result of full
membership.”
“Full membership dependent on mutual efforts”
In the resolution, which noted that full membership depends on the
mutual efforts of both Turkey and the EU, attention was drawn to the
importance of the Turkish and EU publics being provided with
information in an effective manner during the process of Ankara’s
integration.
“Free movement must not disadvantage Turkey”
The resolution, which pointed out that the negotiations process will
be lengthy, called for restrictions on free circulation and
agriculture not to have a negative impact on Turkey’s efforts for
membership.
It was implied in the resolution that it will not be possible for the
full membership negotiations with Turkey to be completed prior to the
goals foreseen in the EU’s budget for the year 2014.
“Restrictions on Greek Cypriot-flagged ships must be lifted”
The resolution, which included a call for Turkey to resolve its
problems with its neighbours in a manner consistent with the UN
Charter, called for the elimination of restrictions on Greek
Cypriot-flagged ships.
“Heybeli Island Theological Seminary must be opened”
The resolution stated that there must be no restrictions on the
activities of minorities in Turkey, and called in this context for
the opening of the [Greek Orthodox] theological seminary on Heybeli
Island.
“Alevi faith must be recognized”
The EP’s resolution included calls for Alevism to be recognized and
protected, including for ‘cemevleri’ [houses of assembly] to be
recognized as religious centers, for religious education to be
voluntary, for effective measures to be taken in combating torture,
and for the Village Guards system in the Southeast to be done away
with.
“Armenian border must be opened”
The advisory resolution, which called for Turkey to open its border
with Armenia, stated that it is necessary that the Turkish and
Armenian governments provide support to a mutual peace process, and
that the bitter experiences of the past be overcome through the
support of independent experts.
“Armenian genocide” motion rejected
In a vote conducted in the General Assembly, an amendment motion
calling for acknowledgement of the so-called Armenian Genocide to be
made a precondition for initiating negotiations was rejected.
Despite this, an amendment motion that made reference to an earlier
advisory resolution of the European Parliament (EP) regarding
recognition of the alleged genocide and another amendment motion
calling for the EU Commission and Council to call upon Turkey to
recognize the alleged genocide were accepted.
“Rejection of privileged partnership proposal”
The EP also rejected an amendment proposal that provided for
“privileged partnership” for Turkey instead of full membership. The
EU resolutions, which are not binding, will be cited in the final
communiqué that will be published at the conclusion of the EU summit.
“Voting in favour of Turkey”
It was observed that, in the vote conducted in the General Assembly,
the Socialist, Liberal, and Green parliamentarians, as well as the
British, Spanish, and Italian members of the Christian Democratic
group, voted in favor of Turkey.
The report drafted by Dutch Christian [Democratic] parliamentarian
Camiel Eurlings, and the advisory resolution based on it, called for
“priority to be given, at the beginning of the negotiations, to the
political criteria being put into implementation.”
The advisory resolution, which called upon the TGNA [Turkish Grand
National Assembly] to approve the six legal changes contained in the
EU Commission’s Progress Report, proposed the “utilization by the EU
Commission of an effective political dialogue, involving a close
monitoring process and providing for a suspension of negotiations if
necessary.”
The deputies who cast their votes in favor of Turkey raised placards
reading ‘evet’ [‘yes’] in Turkish.
“Demonstrations for and against Turkey”
Following the EP’s passage of the advisory resolution which
recommended that the EU initiate full membership negotiations with
Turkey, the city of Strasbourg was the stage of demonstrations both
in favor of and opposing Turkish EU membership.
Supporters of the extreme-right National Front Party in France staged
a demonstration in the center of the city in order to oppose Turkey’s
membership in the EU.
In response to the extreme rightists’ demonstration, a march in favor
of Turkey’s EU membership was staged through the initiative of the
French organization “Justice and Liberty”.
Turkish immigrants in Strasbourg also showed great interest in the
march.
“Eurlings: We want to give Turkey a fair chance”
EP Turkey Rapporteur Camiel Eurlings said that the EU has to give
Turkey a fair chance. Following the voting on the advisory resolution
that the EU take up full membership negotiations with Turkey,
Eurlings and EP Speaker Josep Borrel held a joint press conference.
In the press conference, Eurlings, stating that he was very pleased
with the acceptance of the report and the advisory resolution that he
had drafted, said that priority must be given to the implementation
of the political criteria following the initiation of negotiations.
“Torture and religious minorities”
Eurlings, asserting that “Torture incidents, in particular, must be
prevented”, also stated that “There must be no restrictions on the
worship of religious minorities.”
Eurlings said that “Just as people can easily build mosques in
Europe, it has to be possible for churches to be built in Turkey.”
Noting that the debate on Turkey’s EU membership by both the European
public and the EP has been extremely beneficial, Eurlings said “Not
to discuss this topic in an open way would not be good for Turkey or
for the EU.”
“Borrel: Prejudices regarding Turkey must be abandoned”
As for EP Speaker Josep Borrel, he stated in his remarks that
European public opinion fears Turkey’s membership because it is not
well acquainted with Turkey.
Borrel, stating that there are also prejudices that derive from
history, said that the EP also has responsibilities for making Turkey
known to European public opinion.
Borrel, in response to a question, said that he had decided, in
accordance with the EP by-laws, for the vote to be a secret ballot on
the grounds that requests for this had come from a sufficient number
of parliamentarians.
Representatives of the Socialist, Liberal, and Green groups, who
spoke prior to the vote held in the EP today, had opposed the secret
ballot on grounds of the principle of transparency.
Borrel, noting that Turkey has carried out important reforms, said:
“In my view, Turkey has won the right to begin negotiations with the
EU on full membership.”
“Turkey must recognize the Republic of Cyprus”
Borrel, stating that with the advisory resolution that the EP passed
today, he “reminded Turkey of the reality that the negotiations will
be conducted with the 25 countries of the EU”, said that Turkey also
has to recognize the Republic of Cyprus, because it will be sitting
down to the table with it as well”.
[05] Former Turkish Ambassador and CNN-TURK commentator Yalim Eralp:
“It is possible to establish a provisional solution government”
YENIDUZEN correspondent Sami Ozuslu who went to Brussels to cover the
EU Summit, had a short interview with former Turkish ambassador and
CNN-TURK commentator, Mr Yalim Eralp. Following is the text of the
interview:
Question: Prior to the Brussels Summit if Turkey gets a date what
kind of change could be in Turkey´s Cyprus policy, do you expect any
forward move?
Eralp: I think now others as well will make a forward move. May be Mr
Denktas could propose to Papadopoulos to establish a provisional
solution government.
Question: What would be the system of the provisional government?
Eralp: Of course, the Provisional Government could be a federative
government within the framework of the Annan Plan.
However, searching for the settlement could be envisaged within this
government between Denktas and Papadopoulos.
Question: What do you think about the medium and long-term?
Eralp:This depends on the developments. If Turkey cannot enter into
the EU, then I see a Cyprus settlement very far away.
Question: That is, you do not see any steps to be taken in Cyprus
until Turkey´s accession?
Eralp: I do expect. But if the negotiations are open-ended, then the
settlement in Cyprus should be open ended. It should be bit by bit.
Question: thus, this means putting the Turkish Cypriots and North
Cyprus into the freezer?
Eralp: NO, not to put into the freezer. Slowly, slowly, it should be
integrated, but if Turkey will not be EU member why should it settle
the Cyprus problem then? If it solves, it will be considered stupid.
Aren´t they saying `the Cyprus problem is an obstacle to our EU
membership?” In that case let us turn it upside down and say `why
should I settle the Cyprus problem since I am not a member of EU?”
Question: What do you expect Turkey will get from Brussels? Eralp: I
think Turkey will get a date, however, what is important is the true
nature of the obstacles. That is, your say full membership and you
put such obstacles (Eralp uses the word thorns) that it turns into a
privileged status. One has to pay attention to this”.
[06] Turkish Cypriot newspaper speaks of a possible Cyprus summit in
Brussels in view of Annan´s presence
Turkish Cypriot daily YENIDUZEN newspaper (16.12.04) reports under
banner headlines “One should not be surprised if a Cyprus summit is
held in Brussels” and says that Turkish Industrialists and
Businessmen Association, TUSIAD´s permanent representative at the EU,
Bahadir Kaleagasi has said that UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan´s
arrival to Brussels makes possible the holding of a “Cyprus Summit”
there.
In a statement to YENIDUZEN, Kaleagasi said that it is also possible
that immediately after the EU summit, President Papadopoulos, Prime
Minister Erdogan and Kofi Annan could meet in Brussels. He went on
and said that Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat as well could
be invited to Brussels.
Kaleagasi added that Turkey is yet to pen its cards, and that Turkey,
which supported the Annan Plan, will not recognize the Republic of
Cyprus in its present form.
“It is possible that a Cyprus summit could be held with the arrival
of the UN Secretary-General”, he said.
“The whole intention of Papadopoulos is to realize the recognition
and burry the Annan Plan in the annals of history. In order to
preclude this, Turkey should stand firm. We have lost in Helsinki and
Papadopoulos got strong. Now Turkey came face to face with the
Papapdopoulos reality”, Kaleagasi concluded.
[07] Mr Talat said that the Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas will
start contacts with the political party leaders for the “election”
date
Turkish Cypriot daily KIBRIS newspaper (16/12/04) reports that the
so-called Prime Minister Mehmet Ali Talat, prior to a meeting
yesterday with the so-called Council of Ministers, announced that
they will discuss issues that are in the weekly agenda, adding that
there is nothing extraordinary.
Mr Talat also noted that most probably the Turkish Cypriot leader Mr
Rauf Denktas will start meetings with party leaders on Monday for the
“elections” date.
Commenting on the resolution on Turkey’s progress towards European
Union accession, which was adopted by the European Parliament
yesterday, Mr Talat said that it is an important development.
[08] An opinion poll conducted in the occupied areas shows the
Republican Turkish Party in the lead with 31%
Turkish Cypriot daily KIBRISLI newspaper (16.12.04) publishes an
opinion poll regarding the support that the Turkish Cypriot political
parties receive in occupied Cyprus. The opinion poll was conducted by
the Prologue Consulting Ltd.
According to the poll, the Republican Turkish Party-United Forces
(RTP-UF) of Mehmet Ali Talat comes first with 31%, the National Unity
Party (NUP) of Dervis Eroglu comes second with 15%, the Democratic
Party (DP) of Serdar Denktas comes third with 6%, the Peace and
Democracy Movement (PDM) of Mustafa Akinci comes fourth with 3% and
the Communal Liberation Party (CLP) of Huseyin Angolemli comes fifth
with 2%. In addition, 26% are undecided, 9% will vote to none and 8%
is mixed.
Commenting on the results of the opinion poll, KIBRISLI writes inter
alia that the 6% that the DP receives is evaluated in various ways by
the political observers. According to the paper a big percentage of
the undecided persons comes from the NUP and supports that these
persons may vote for the DP in the “elections”. It also writes that
the 17 December Summit’s result will affect the decision of the
undecided persons.
KIBRISLI also writes that someone who evaluates the results must bare
in mind that the Turkish Cypriot parties have not yet decided about
their “candidates” and have neither started they are “election”
campaign nor declared their political position.
——————————————————————————–
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
[09] Columnist in STAR newspaper argues that Turkey intends to
exploit possible resumption of Cyprus talks to avoid signing the
protocol it will commit itself to sign during the EU Summit
Istanbul STAR newspaper (15.12.04) publishes the following commentary
by Zeynep Gurcanli under the title: “The Cyprus chess game in
Brussels”:
“The paragraph on Turkey, other than the date the negotiations would
start, has become finalized prior to the 17 December summit. Only one
major problem remains between Ankara and the European capital cities:
Cyprus.
Two days before the summit a diplomatic chess game in its full sense
is being played between Turkey and the EU.
In response to the “requests of solidarity” of the Greek Cypriots,
who put their EU membership in their “pockets”, the EU has brought
the subject of Cyprus to a “condition, which is not a condition” in
order to start the negotiations with Turkey.
Within this framework, the Netherlands, which is carrying out the EU
Term Presidency, worked out a formula.
The formula found is Turkey’s acceptance of a decree similar to the
one that previously included the Greek Cypriots in the Customs Union,
but with a somewhat more extensive scope.
It was established on Turkey’s signing a protocol expanding the
Ankara Agreement in a manner that would also include the countries,
which are new EU members.
The Netherlands did not only constitute this formula. It also made a
“sounding out” in order to be able to understand whether or not
Ankara would consider this favourably.
It put a sentence, which contained the message, “The EU would meet
with pleasure Turkey’s acceptance of signing the protocol, which
would expand the Ankara Agreement in a manner that would also include
the new members of the EU.” Furthermore, this sentence was put in the
Turkey part in the declaration and the subject of Cyprus completely
became a “condition, which is not a condition,” for the negotiations.
Ankara’s reaction against this came from Foreign Minister Abdullah
Gul. Minister Gul, in a letter he sent to all of the EU countries,
listed one by one all of the elements that Turkey could not accept in
the first draft prepared by the Netherlands. Within these elements,
he also included putting the Cyprus subject into the Turkey
paragraph. And he made the criticism, “Putting the Cyprus subject
directly into the Turkey paragraph gives the impression that this
problem has been transformed into a condition for starting the
negotiations.”
But Minister Gul did not show any reaction to the part in the draft
text related to the signing of the protocol. And the Netherlands, in
the drafts it prepared later, removed the Cyprus paragraph from the
Turkey section in accordance with the criticisms of Minister Gul and
placed it in the appendix section. But still, it did not change the
expression related to the signing of the protocol.
What is interesting is that Ankara did not direct a criticism to
these expressions in the drafts, which were prepared later. This
silence of Ankara was interpreted in the EU capital cities that
Turkey would accept to sign this protocol before the negotiations
start.
Subtitle: Resuming the Cyprus talks
Putting the expressions related to the signing of the protocol in the
declaration was the move of the EU side in the diplomatic chess game.
Ankara’s first move in response to this was “to remain silent.” That
is, Ankara neither committed itself nor rejected the signing of the
protocol. Actually, the calculations of the next move in the chess
game lie behind this silence.
All of the signs in Brussels prior to the 17 December summit show
that immediately after giving a negotiation date to Turkey, the peace
talks on Cyprus would be resumed.
Ankara, just as it did in the previous talks, aims to continue its
“encouraging” role in the new round of talks as well.
Starting the Cyprus negotiations would have the meaning of preventing
the Greek Cypriots, who corner Ankara at every opportunity, by using
their title of “full EU member” as they want.
If the Cyprus talks conclude positively, then in any case, the
problem would be solved. But if the talks are prolonged or do not
produce a result, then Turkey, “which encouraged peace,” would gain
time. And it would be saved from signing the Cyprus protocol, which
became a de facto “condition” for the starting the negotiations with
the final move of the Netherlands or it would be able to postpone the
signing of it. The majority of the people in Brussels do not expect a
“last minute bad surprise” just before the summit on 17 December.
Even the statements of the French Foreign Minister Barnier, “We will
bring the Armenian tragedy to the negotiations,” is considered as a
domestic political move, which aims to silence the French socialists
in the opposition and not much importance is attached to it.
These days, both the EU and Ankara are considering 17 December “to be
finished” and are making the moves for the diplomatic struggle, which
will be experienced after this and which will be “real” and
“tougher.” ”
–Boundary_(ID_KwRPQxjcOlzwIEW5q8kprA)–

Press and Information Office, Occupied Northern Cyprus
Dec 17 2004
Cyprus PIO: Turkish Press and Other Media
[01] Turkey refuses to accept the decisions of the EU Summit.
[02] Erdogan wants to have a peace coffee with President Papadopoulos
amongst the thousands of occupation troops.
[03] Hours before the EU Summit Erdogan declares ready to take a step
regarding the Cyprus problem.
[04] Solana: It will be difficult for Turkey to accede to the EU
without recognizing the Republic of Cyprus.
[05] Turkish sources on the meeting between Mr Karamanlis and
Erdogan.
[06] EU Commission President is quoted to have said that Turkey would
be in a position to recognize all the EU members when it becomes full
member.
[07] Gul rules out direct or indirect recognition of the Republic of
Cyprus.
[08] Berlusconi explains that the 3rd October was fixed to give
Turkey time to recognize the Republic of Cyprus.
[09] Erodgan is quoted to have reprimanded the Dutch Presidency for
not ignoring the Greek Cypriots who are only 600,000.
[10] Turkey ordered investigation against Kurds.
[11] Serdar Denktas stated that the first step in removing the
“isolation” imposed on the Turkish Cypriots to come from the USA.
[12] How the Turkish and the Turkish Cypriot press covers last
night’s Summit.
[13] Direct trade with the occupied areas of Cyprus of concern for
Spain.
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
[14] Columnist in STAR argues that Turkey´s refusal to co-operate
with the US during the Iraq war has meant the end of the two
countries´ strategic partnership.
——————————————————————————–
[A] NEWS ITEMS
[01] Turkey refuses to accept the decisions of the EU Summit
Ankara Anatolia news agency (A.A) (17.12.04) reported from Brussels
that the second day of the meeting of the European Council started on
Friday with delay as compromise could not be reached between Turkey
and the European Union (EU).
EU heads of state and government waited till the end of the meeting
between Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Prime
Minister Jan Peter Balkenende of the EU Acting President the
Netherlands.
Also, European Parliament (EP) President Josep Borrell and United
Nations (UN) Secretary-General Kofi Annan can’t obey their earlier
set schedule.
On the other hand, Balkenende is expected to brief EU heads of state
and government on his meeting with Erdogan. Sources say that there
can be some new meetings between Erdogan, who is still in the
building where the summit is being held, and EU representatives later
today.
Ankara Anatolia further reported from that scenarios circulate in
Council lobbies regarding alternative ways out as the meeting between
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Dutch Prime Minister Jan
Peter Balkenende, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency,
continued.
The first scenario is: ”Turkey will accept extending the Ankara
Agreement to cover all the European Union (EU) countries including
Cyprus, by putting some conditions.”
Diplomatic sources said the EU presidency would then have the chance
to put pressure on the Cyprus government.
The second scenario says: ”Turkey will depart from Brussels without
signing the presidency conclusion added to final statement.”
Diplomatic sources said the ”ties would not be broken” in this
case, stating that a negotiation process that will continue till
October 3rd, 2005 could start.
Meanwhile, the leaders of Britain, Germany, France, the Netherlands
and Greece convened to assess the Cyprus issue.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter
Balkenende, French President Jacques Chirac, and German Chancellor
Gerhard Schroeder are discussing overcoming the deadlock regarding
Cyprus.
[02] Erdogan wants to have a peace coffee with President Papadopoulos
amongst the thousands of occupation troops
Ankara Anatolia news agency (16.12.04) reported from Brussels that
during a meeting with Turkish columnists in Brussels, Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has stated that Turkey’s accession into
the European Union will result in conciliation of civilizations. “Our
European friends are aware of the role Turkey can play in harmonizing
relations between civilizations. There are now many European circles
that look at Turkish membership as crucial and absolutely necessary,”
told Erdogan.
In response to a question on Turkey-Armenia relations, Erdogan
replied that if and when a positive approach is witnessed from the
Armenian side, Turkey would be ready to open its border gate with
Armenia. “Whatever took place in history must remain in history. We
must build our new world on peace. We are positive towards Armenia.
We want national borders to be respected. We have made Turkish air
space available to Armenian commercial planes. There is no reason as
to why we should not open the border gate as well. However, we want
to see the same positive attitude from the Armenian side as well. An
important part of Azerbaijan is still under Armenian military
occupation. This fact should not be ignored and forgotten,” said
Erdogan.
Erdogan said Turkey is prepared for a temporary ban on the free
movement of Turks in EU countries. “Yet a permanent ban on the free
movement of Turkish nationals would be against the EU laws and
regulations.”
In reference to the problems created in Cyprus by Turkey´s occupation
of its Northern part, Erdogan remarked that Turkey is ready to
discuss Cyprus during its entry talks with the EU.
He noted that it would mean failure of all efforts if EU leaders put
a text which they would not say “yes” on the table. “I hope they
won’t,” he added. Turkey expects the formal announcement on the
conclusion of the EU summit tomorrow (Friday) at 13.00 hours. “It
would be wrong to declare the summit’s decision as victory. We must
not be spoiled by our success. Furthermore, a possible negative
summit decision should not be viewed as a big disaster. Whatever the
decision at the summit, Turkey can continue to develop on its own
feet,” said Erdogan.
“Maybe we can go to Northern Cyprus one day, and invite Papadopoulos.
We can have a coffee of peace and a meal of peace there,” Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan added.
[03] Hours before the EU Summit Erdogan declares ready to take a step
regarding the Cyprus problem
Istanbul NTV television (16.12.04) broadcast the following:
“Turkish Prime Minister Mr Recep Tayyip Erdogan has held a news
conference in Brussels where he commented on the EU summit. He
stressed that Turkey will not reach a decision on Cyprus that runs
counter to national interests. He said: “We are ready to take a step
in Cyprus, but the nature of the step is important.”
The prime minister held a 25-minute news conference for the reporters
who are constantly following him. He talked about all his talks
today, and pointed out that he met with 12 leaders throughout the
day. He summarized the situation ever since the Customs Union of
1996.
The EU leaders are currently at a dinner. Chirac is not attending
this dinner. Prime Minister Erdogan said that Chirac would not be
attending the dinner due to his own private affairs. Erdogan said
that after the dinner, term president Balkenende will call him on the
telephone and update him on the developments.
The prime minister was asked about the Cyprus question, because the
Greek media reported that at their meeting today Greek Prime Minister
Karamanlis asked Erdogan for a written declaration that he would
recognize the Cyprus Republic, and that Erdogan rejected this offer.
Erdogan said at his news conference: Things that we have not said
were published. That is out of the question. This is gossip. These
things are not even in the text of the document. The basic principle
of our government and of our party is not to take any step that may
run counter to our national interests. Neither our training nor our
view of history would allow us to do such a thing.
Erdogan stressed that all the leaders he met today did their homework
very well and were aware of Turkey’s sensitivities. He added: The
terms that are used in bilateral talks, especially the terms used in
the text of the document, carry different weights. You cannot use
certain terms on certain occasions. It is true that we are ready to
take a step in Cyprus, but the nature of the step is extremely
important for us.
The prime minister said that during the talks he noticed that the
issue of privileged partnership is completely out of the agenda. He
added: The hard negotiations will begin after the text assumes its
final shape. Those developments will take place in the morning hours.
We will make our final decision at 1300 tomorrow. You will see then
what I am going to do.”
[04] Mr Javier Solana stresses that it will be difficult for Turkey
to accede to the EU without recognizing the Republic of Cyprus
Ankara Anatolia news agency (16.12.04) reported from Brussels that
Finland has extended full support to opening of entry talks between
Turkey and the EU.
Releasing a written statement prior to the EU Summit, Finland said
that Helsinki was in favour of opening of entry talks between Turkey
and the EU in 2005. Finland stressed that the only target of the
talks should be full membership of Turkey.
Meanwhile, EU Policy Chief Javier Solana called on Turkey to
recognize the Republic of Cyprus.
“If you want to become a part of a family, you have to recognize all
members of that family, otherwise you cannot become a member of that
family”, Solana told reporters.
Solana stressed that if Turkey did not recognize the Republic of
Cyprus side, its full membership would be difficult.
[05] Turkish sources on the meeting between Mr Karamanlis and Erdogan
in Brussels
Ankara Anatolia news agency (16.12.04) reported from Brussels that
Greek Premier Costas Karamanlis told Turkish Premier Recep Tayyip
Erdogan that they want Turkey to recognize the Cyprus Republic.
Sources said that during the Erdogan-Karamanlis meeting, the Cyprus
problem was discussed and Karamanlis told Erdogan: ”It is
unacceptable if a country which wants to be an EU member does not
recognize an EU member.”
Sources said that Karamanlis told Erdogan: ”At the first stage
Turkey can sign the Customs Union protocol covering all new members
of the EU and then it can officially recognize the Cyprus Republic”.
” Erdogan in return said: ”A solution within the framework of the
UN is necessary in Cyprus,” and he repeated the Turkish stand.
Erdogan did not present a new proposal to Karamanlis, added the
sources.
The sources said: ”At the current stage, negotiations are still
continuing. Other EU member countries also have the same stance as
Athens.’
[06] EU Commission President is quoted to have said that Turkey would
be in a position to recognize all the EU members when it becomes full
member
Ankara Anatolia news agency (16.12.04) reported from Brussels that
the European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso on Thursday
told a press conference prior to EU summit that a historic decision
would be made for Turkey, and noted that Turkey was a very different
country with its geographical position, position as bridge, economic
power, and potential.
Barroso said a balanced attitude was pursued towards Turkey, noting
that they were aware of the problems, but at the same time the steps
Turkey made were also taken into consideration. He said: ”Time came
to start negotiations” and stressed that the target would be full
membership in negotiations.
Mentioning the concerns in several member countries and Europe´s
public opinions about Turkey’s accession to the EU, Barroso called on
Turkey to take more steps toward Europe.
Barroso said Greek Cypriots would also be at the table, ”however,”
he noted Turkey did not recognize the Republic of Cyprus.
Replying to a question about the Cyprus issue, Barroso said no new
political conditions would be imposed on Turkey and that Turkey would
be in a position to recognize all the member countries when it
becomes the EU full member.
Replying to a question about permanent derogations proposed for
Turkey, Barroso said he thought this problem would be solved in the
summit and that Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
sensitively focused on this issue.
Barroso said the European Commission brought this proposal about free
movement of Turkish workers, yet that any discrimination or special
status was not in question. He said there was much concern about this
issue in some member countries, noting that permanent derogations
were implemented on some member countries.
Focusing on the concerns of the EU public opinion often, Barroso said
Turkey would be in a position to struggle much to convince the
public.
Replying to a question about the genocide committed against the
Armenians, Barroso said bringing new political conditions in front of
Turkey at the last minute was out of the question.
[07] Gul rules out direct or indirect recognition of the Republic of
Cyprus
Ankara Anatolia news agency (16.12.04) reported from Brussels that
the Turkish Foreign Minister, Mr Gul on Thursday said: ”Direct or
indirect recognition of the Cyprus Republic is out of the question
for Turkey,”
When reporters reminded the statements of Danish Premier Anders Fogh
Rasmussen who said, ”Turkey is ready to recognize Cyprus,” Gul who
is in Brussels said: ”There are misunderstandings about these
issues. Direct or indirect recognition of the Cyprus Republic is out
of the question for Turkey.”
[08] Berlusconi explains that the 3rd October was fixed to give
Turkey time to recognize the Republic of Cyprus
Local KIBRIS newspaper (17.12.04) reports that the Italian Prime
Minister, Mr Silvio Berlusconi, has said that if Turkey does not
recognize the Republic of Cyprus until October the 3rd 2005, the
negotiations cannot start.
“We expect that until the 3rd of October 2005 the Turkish government
will recognize the Republic of Cyprus”, Mr Berlusconi said.
The paper also reports that the Italian Prime Minister said that the
Turkish Prime Minister told him that they could recognize the
Republic of Cyprus but this can be done by a decision of the
Parliament and they need time.
“In order to provide time to Erdogan we have chosen the 3rd of
October”, said Mr Berlusconi, concludes KIBRIS newspaper.
On the same issue, Ankara Anatolia (17.12.04) reported from Brussels
the following:
“The Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has quoted Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan as saying that ”they were ready to
start initiative to recognize ‘Cyprus Republic’, but they needed time
to make majority of Turkish parliament accept it in the past.”
Berlusconi told a group of journalists in French: ”Erdogan has told
me that they were ready to start initiative to recognize Cyprus, but
they would need time to make the majority of Turkish parliament
accept it. We have given him required time. One should recognize all
members of the family if he wants to join that family. This is not a
condition, but a reality.” Noting that Austria and France did not
take a step back in the working dinner, but they supported Turkey and
they would do their best till morning.
Turkish diplomatic sources told A.A that Berlusconi made this
statement in French which he was not very fluent so that there may be
differences in the meaning. They added that ”it was out of question
that Erdogan made such statements regarding Cyprus to Berlusconi.”
[09] Erodgan is quoted to have reprimanded the Dutch Presidency for
not ignoring the Greek Cypriots who are only 600,000
Istanbul NTV television (17.12.04) broadcast the following dialogue
with its correspondent Unsal Unlu in Brussels: “Good morning Unsal,
what are the issues on today’s program of Erdogan and Gul? And is
there any possibility of the Cyprus predicament turning into a
crisis?
Mr Unlu replied: It is still too early to say whether it would turn
into a crisis. But it is possible to state clearly that there is a
serious anxiety concerning this issue. Even, according to information
reaching us, during yesterday’s meeting between Balkenende and
Erdogan voices have been raised a bit. The condition for the indirect
recognition of the Greek Cypriot sector, that is the extension of the
Ankara agreement by 3 October, has infuriated Prime Minister Erdogan.
Prime Minister Erdogan has said: You preferred 600,000 Greek Cypriots
to 70-million Turks; this means that we have not been able to explain
anything to you.
Erdogan has openly voiced his concern on this issue by saying: How
can I explain this to 70-million-strong Turkey?
Let me also note that the final draft from the delegation has again
been submitted to the EU term chairman. We can say that the talks
that continued into the morning hours have entered their last round.
The leaders will pose for a family photo at around 1300 [1000 GMT]
and with that the time will have reached for the knot to untie, as
Prime Minister Erdogan put it yesterday. The summit text will be
announced then. The text is proposing the start of Turkey’s
negotiations with the EU on 3 October 2005, but the condition on the
recognition of the Greek Cypriot sector has greatly disturbed
Turkey.”
[10] Turkey ordered investigation against the Kurds for the
advertisement published in foreign newspapers
Ankara TRT 1 Television (16.12.04) broadcast the following: “An
investigation has been launched into the advertisement scandal. The
Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office has launched an investigation
into the advertisement that appeared in foreign newspapers and which
was signed by the former DEP [Democracy Party] deputies, certain
mayors, and others.
The Justice Ministry sent newspaper clippings of the advertisement to
the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office for an investigation.
Press Prosecutor Kursat Kayral has been assigned to conduct the
investigation.
After the advertisement was published in foreign newspapers, some of
the persons who had signed it said that they had not seen the last
version of the text”.
[11] Serdar Denktas stated that the first step in removing the
“isolation” imposed on the Turkish Cypriots to come from the USA
Turkish Cypriot daily KIBRISLI newspaper (17.12.04) reports that Mr
Serdar Denktas, the chairman of the Democratic Party (DP) and
so-called minister of foreign affairs of the occupation regime made
statements to the paper as regards the issue of lifting the so-called
isolation imposed on the Turkish Cypriots.
Mr Serdar Denktas stated that after the 17 December he expects steps
to be taken as regards the removing of the “isolation” imposed on the
Turkish Cypriots. However he said that these steps will not come only
from the EU, but firstly from the USA.
[12] How the Turkish and the Turkish Cypriot press covers last
night’s Summit in Brussels
The Turkish and the Turkish Cypriot press covers today (17.12.04)
widely last night’s Summit in Brussels.
Turkish mainland MILLIYET under the banner headline “Marathon
bargaining for Cyprus”, writes that Ankara gave the message “we will
take steps”, as regards the Cyprus problem which was an issue of
priority in Brussels. It also writes that the Ankara formula is the
following: It can sign the Customs Agreement but Ankara will
determine when.
Turkish mainland HURRIYET, under the title “New life”, writes that
the historic date was announced for Turkey as regards the EU
membership which will be the second most important step for the
country since the establishment of the republic. It also writes that
the decision is the beginning of a new era.
In addition Turkish mainland SABAH newspaper has Ataturk’s picture in
its first page with the caption 29 October 1923-17 December 2004, and
under the banner headline “Gentlemen!” writes the following using
capital letters: “We said what we said 81 years ago. We did for
ourselves what we did for the modernisation. From now on we will move
forward on the road we consider to be right”.
Local KIBRIS newspaper, under the headline “Date for Turkey” writes
that the leaders of the EU suggested the 3rd of October 2005 as a
date for the beginning of the negotiations for the country. It also
writes that the end of the negotiations is still open and there is no
guarantee for full membership.
AFRIKA under the title “3rd of October 2005 the final date for
Turkey” writes that the negotiations will start aiming for full
membership and that a compromise solution will be found in case the
negotiations will not be completed successfully. In addition the
paper writes that Turkey will recognise the Republic of Cyprus before
the 3rd of October 2005.
Under the headline “Destiny date”, VATAN quotes the Turkish Prime
Minister Tayyip Erdogan’s statement that if the developments are not
as Turkey wants them to be, they will “cut” the efforts for joining
the EU as Norway did.
ORTAM covers the issue under the title “Danger from the bitter result
for the Turkish Cypriots” publishes statements by Mr Huseyin
Angolemli chairman of the Communal Liberation Party that the policy
of “wait-and-see” until the 17 December on which the Turkish Cypriots
were relying on started to give results and stated that these results
will be bitter for the Turkish Cypriots.
Under the title “Open-ended negotiations for Turkey”, HALKIN SESI
writes that Turkey will start negotiations on the 3rd of October and
the target of the negotiations will be the full membership of Turkey.
In addition it writes that the bargaining as regards Cyprus and the
derogations will continue until the last moment.
CUMHURIYET North Cyprus, under the title “We will not recognise
Cyprus at this point” writes that the Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan
did not change his attitude despite all the efforts made by President
Papadopoulos.
GUNES, under the title “Cyprus knot” writes that the Turkish Prime
Minister did not support the recognition of the Republic of Cyprus
before a solution. It also writes that Mr Erdogan met with the Geek
Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis and that he said that “tomorrow
(today) at 13:00 ‘the Cyprus knot’ will be solved”.
VOLKAN under the title “If they have the firman (the imperial edict)
we have the mountains”, writes that the Turkish Prime Minister
Erdogan by saying that ‘the Cyprus knot will be solved today at
13:00’ it became obvious that the fate of the persons who live in
occupied Cyprus will be determined today.
YENI DUZEN under the title “Cyprus ‘calm’ before the storm” writes
that after the end of the 17 Summit very important developments will
follow and stresses that most important of them is related to the
issue of the recognition of the Republic of Cyprus which, according
to the paper is a tough issue.
KIBRISLI is the only paper which gives minimum coverage to the Summit
in its first page and writes only that the 3rd of October 2005 was
the suggested date for the beginning of Turkey’s EU negotiations.
[13] EU regulation for direct trade with the occupied areas of Cyprus
is a great concern for Spain
Turkish Cypriot daily YENIDUZEN newspaper (17.12.04), under the title
“Spanish obstacle to Direct Trade”, reports from Brussels that
besides Greece and the Cyprus Government, Spain as well, is against
“direct trade” with the Turkish Cypriots, because they worry that
then it will open the road for the “direct trade” to the communities
of Ceuta, Melilla and Gibraltar, which are under the administration
of Spain. However, it is reported that the regulations of the
European Commission can only be accepted with “weighted vote”.
An EU official, who said that there is on the negotiation table a
“package” of the regulations of the Direct Trade and the Financial
Aid, which is about 259 million Euro, noted that the “Greek Cypriot
Administration’s” attempt to separate the two regulations were
unsuccessful.
The surprise is that apart from the Greek Cypriot side and Greece
that are against the direct trade Spain is also against. The reason
that the Madrid administration, which did not say much until now
about the Cyprus issue, is against the regulation is very
interesting.
A high level official from the Enlargement Section of the EU
Commission made interesting statements to YENIDUZEN at the Brussels
summit regarding the efforts of lifting the isolation and what is
expected at the Cyprus problem after the summit.
The high level official, who wanted to remain anonymous, reminded
that the preparations regarding the isolations, which were decided
after the outcome of the referendums, were suspended until the 1st
January 2005, when Luxemburg will take over the EU’s term Presidency.
The official, who believes that the new term President will bring to
the agenda for discussion this issue, sent the message that important
developments are expected after the 17 December summit.
The official announced that Spain doesn’t support the direct trade
with the Turkish Cypriots and gives support to the Lefkosia
administration and Athens on that issue.
According to the information the EU official gave, the reason why the
Spanish administration is against the direct trade is three small
areas, two near Morocco and one in Gibraltar. Giving direct trade
possibilities to the Turkish Cypriots will create precedence to these
three areas, namely Ceuta, Melilla and Gibraltar.
——————————————————————————–
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
[14] Columnist in STAR argues that Turkey´s refusal to co-operate
with the US during the Iraq war has meant the end of the two
countries´ strategic partnership
Istanbul STAR newspaper (15.12.04) publishes the following commentary
by Tulin Daloglu under the title: “Strategic partnership ends!”:
“While hoping that we shall be moving one step closer to the European
Union at the end of this week, Turkey’s foreign policy, which all
along has been one step more on the side of the United States, has
changed direction because of the Iraqi war. Having reluctantly
accepted within democratic rules the result of the voting on the 1
March [2002] authorization bill [for the dispatch of Turkish military
units abroad and deployment of foreign forces in Turkey], the US
officials had said the decision, although a democratic one, would
inevitably have a cost in the political sense. It appears that this
political cost has spelled out the end of the strategic partnership,
which had a name but no effect in the relations between the two
countries. Well, what does this mean? How does Washington assess an
Ankara that is close to Europe? Here are a few observations:
Following his talks with Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul in
Ankara in April 2003 and in Washington in July 2003 and January 2004,
US Secretary of State Colin Powell had described, at the joint press
conferences, the relations between the two countries as strong,
friendly and historic. He had not used the word strategic. This must
not have been a coincidence, because former US Ambassador in Ankara
Mark Parris, with the comfort of having retired, said there were
certain issues that would not be conducive to continuity in the
relations with Turkey due to the Turkish Government’s dialogues with
Washington in the last two years. He noted, though, that this was not
due to Turkey’s closer relations with Europe.
Despite the fact that the Americans officially state that they have
overcome the 1 March shock, they do not fail to say that a strategic
partner would not have acted in the way that Turkey did. It is the
failure to overcome this shock that has led Washington to watch with
caution and interest Ankara’s approach to Brussels. Let us
immediately emphasize, though, that Washington lends full support to
Turkey’s EU objective. Yet, ahead of our historic week, both Parris
and Under Secretary for Political Affairs Marc Grossman, in the
statements they made on various occasions, emphasized that Turkey did
not have to distance itself from the United States just because it is
approaching the EU.
While stressing that political and economic stability in Iraq would
be to Turkey’s advantage, Grossman also gave the message: You should
not forget that this depends on our success in Iraq. Behind this
warning is the unease felt over the increasing opposition to the
United States in Turkey. The accusation that the United States
committed genocide in Iraq has been viewed as a criticism that goes
too far, does not reflect the realities and does not reflect well
upon an ally. The United States expects a debate on how Iraq may be
led to stability rather than expressing the view that whatever it
does in Iraq is wrong.
Would the priority be Iraq or the PKK [Workers Party of Kurdistan]?
Judging from the present-day realities, it does not seem possible
that the United States will get what it expects from the Turkish
public opinion since it has not engaged in any military operation
against the PKK. On the contrary, it is believed that the United
States follows policies that threaten the territorial integrity of
Iraq by ultimately creating an independent Kurdistan. By refusing to
take a position on the side of the United States, Ankara believes
that it has taken the measures to overcome its fear. History has
proved that the cost of wrong alliances has been high. The story as
to how Iraq was established after it was broken away from the Ottoman
territories may be cited as an example. History proves that the
British had no intention to tear up the Ottoman territories until the
Ottomans joined an alliance with Germany in World War I. Commenting
on Turkey’s stand against the United States, a senior US official
said: “Such a fear on the part of Turkey would be unfounded. We are
after stability. An independent Kurdistan will create uneasiness in
the whole area rather than only in Turkey. This conflicts with our
interests.”
In the meantime, Parris pointed out that the best period of
Turkish-American relations was between 1997 and 1999, when the
relations with Europe were severed. It is known that at the end of
this period, the United States had caught PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan
and had handed him over to Turkey. If you view it from a natural
theory of logic, the reason for the lack of action against the PKK is
as old as the Stone Age.
Continue with both
As a matter of fact, Grossman’s and Parris’ messages to Ankara are
clear: Turkey should not choose between the EU and the United States.
It should vigorously keep up its dialogue with both. Otherwise, the
loser will be Turkey. Turkey needs both the EU and the United States
in order to be an effective country in its region. One wonders
whether Washington is trying to prepare Turkey to serve as a bridge
between the EU and the United States before it becomes a bridge
between the East and the West”.
–Boundary_(ID_rDKduYN2CVKO6pB6JUtprQ)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

European Parliament says yes to beginning accession talks with Turkey but sets conditions
Athens News Agency
Dec 16 2004
The European Parliament’s Plenary Session on Wednesday approved the
Eurlings Report regarding Turkey’s progress towards EU accession,
with 407 voting for it, 262 against it, and 29 abstaining. Thus, the
European Parliament is in favor of beginning EU accession talks with
Turkey without unnecessary delay and says that Turkey must recognize
Cyprus. Aditionally, Eurodeputies have rejected the option of
establishing a ‘privileged partnership with the EU’.
Among the amendments approved and which are of interest to Greece is
amendment 59, which was proposed by the Socialist Eurodeputies. The
amendment calls on the council to realize its promises and to end the
Turkish Cypriot community’s isolation, and to quickly approve the two
regulations regarding financial aid and commercial relations with the
northern part of the island.
Another amendment proposed by Athanassios Pafilis and Diamanto
Manolakou from the United Left was rejected. Pafilis’ and Manolakou’s
suggestion was for the issue of the continental shelf in the Aegean
to be referred to the International Court in the event that it wasn’t
resolved otherwise.
Amendment 31, which requested that the Committee formulate a “road
map” with a timeframe regarding the implementation of the Copenhagen
criteria, with special emphasis given to: the recognition of Cyprus
and the withdrawal of Turkish occupational forces from the island;
progress in resolving problems related to the Kurds, guarantee of
human rights and fundamental civil liberties in theory and practice.
The voting was conducted by secret ballot, something that provoked
many reactions. “The ALDE [Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for
Europe] group is opposed to holding a secret vote on the Turkey
report. Parliamentary responsibility and political accountability
require MEPs to take positions openly. We reject the coward’s option”
ALDE leader Graham Watson said.
“Our view is that fundamental decisions must be clear, open and
transparent so that voters know what their elected representatives
are doing on their behalf,” Socialist Group leader Martin Schulz
said.
The United Left asked European Parliament President Josep Borrell for
the issue of the secret vote to be voted upon. Borrell said that he
had examined the issue with the Parliament’s legal department and had
concluded that the secret vote was legal.
ND Eurodeputy comments on outcome
“The message that the European Parliament has sent to Turkey by
adopting the report of Camiel Eurlings, Dutch Eurodeputy of the
European People’s Party, is multidimensional and at the same time
crystal clear,” head of New Democracy Eurodeputies Ioannis
Varvitsiotis said.
“Turkey has to realize that it has to fulfill all that is outlined in
the Eurlings report,” Varvitsiotis stressed. “That includes
continuation of reforms, recognition of the Republic of Cyprus,
immediate re-opening of the Theological School of Halki, public use
of the ecclesiastical title Ecumenical Patriarchate and protection of
the basic rights of all Christian minorities and communities in
Turkey, such as the Greeks of Istanbul, Imvros and Tenedos,” he
added.
Furthermore, the European Parliament has also asked that Turkey
recognize the Armenian genocide and to protect Kurds’ rights.

SURPRISES IN THE PACKAGE
The Hindu, India
December 18, 2004
THE CHENNAI International Film Festival (on till December 27),
organised by the Indo Cine Appreciation Foundation, has expanded this
year to screen five films a day at Anand and Little Anand Theatres,
and four films at the Film Chamber of Commerce.
Anand is the place to be on December 18 where award winning
Armenian-born, Canada-bred Atom Egoyan’s “Ararat” (2004) is being
screened. The film probes into tragedies of living families and
distant history. Raffi’s cans of films are relentlessly examined by
about-to-retire customs officer David, struggling with his own
adjustment problems with gay son’s lifestyle. The interrogation
becomes a quest for identity through deceit, denial and repression.
The day ends with a Brazilian romp in “Celeste and Estrela” (2003)
where Paulo Estrela narrated a hilarious story of falling in love
with film maker Celeste who is passionate about making a
gut-wrenching film about her motherland. Finding funds is an arduous
struggle. We flit in and out of corporate houses, studios, script
writing classes, location shoots, and into the dreams of Celeste and
Estrela. Betse de Paula’s film foams with farce and irony, turning an
amused but sympathetic eye on men and women with and without
missions.
A wistful note
Known more for his kooky grotequerie, Giuseppe Pupi Avati strikes a
wistful note in “The Heart is Everywhere” (Italy, 2003). A
nondescript teacher’s son is urged by cranky father to find a wife,
stumbles into a home for the blind and meets the stunning woman,
robbed of her eyes in an accident. Silvio Soldini’s “Agata and the
Storm” trickles into a woman’s craze for younger men and her
lost-and-found brother’s infidelities.
Karen Shakhnazarov’s “The Rider Named Death” (Russia) shows Moscow at
the dawn of the 20th Century. This is the acclaimed depiction of the
plot to assassinate a Grand Duke in his home and at the Bolshoi
theatre.
A sweet-sad tale
The CIFF also brings “Shwaas” (Marathi, Sandeep Sawant), India’s
entry for the Oscars on December 19. This debut film is a sweet-sad
tale of a grandfather trying to do his best for the grandchild with
retinoblastoma, who must lose both his eyes to survive. The film had
a commercial success in Maharashtra before winning the National Award
for Best Film. The day also brings “Nizhalkuthu” (Film Chamber
Theatre), part of the festival’s retrospective on one of India’s best
film makers. Adoor Gopalakrishnan’s narrative resounds with the
echoes of a parable. We watch the village hangman at home,
interacting with family and community, until the ominous call comes
for him to discharge his duty. The son has to shoulder the job now.
The eerie count down begins…
Catch up with “Goodbye Lenin” if you haven’t seen it already. A young
man struggles to save his politically active mother from the shock of
learning that her world has crumbled. (She goes into a coma in
Communist East Germany and wakes up in a capitalist nation). Visually
thrilling moments include the floating of Lenin’s figure above and
across the street, pointing a grim finger at pedestrians below.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Let’s celebrate politically correctly in every way.
The Free Lance-Star, VA
Dec 18 2004
Goodwill to men, women, kids, humanoids
THE PIOUS FOLK who exhorted their countrymen to “put the Christ back
in Christmas” have lost. How badly? Not only is the “Christ-” not
there, neither is the “-mas.” The very phrase “Merry Christmas!”
seems to be disappearing from general usage. People now attend
“holiday parties,” post “season’s greetings,” and exchange wishes of
“Happy holidays.” This is a good start toward peaceful coexistence in
our beloved multicultural nation, Bosnia. We mean, America.
After all, many of us do not celebrate Christmas. This minority
includes Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, some Unitarians, atheists, and
agnostics. Even among Christian sects, one finds non-celebrants, such
as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and churches that observe the feast on a
different day than Dec. 25, such as the Armenian Orthodox, whose
Christmas arrives on Jan. 6. So, clearly, “Christmas” is a term of
exclusion that should be retired in our outreaching society. That, as
we say, is a good start–but only a start.
When deconstructed, the adjective “Merry” is also (if we may make a
“value judgment”) mean-spirited. Not everyone is merry. It’s easy for
high extroverts on the Myers-Briggs personality grid to exude
“merriness.” They could do that even if staked out on an anthill. But
what about high introverts? Why should we bully them to be something
they’re not? Don’t they have a right to be reserved and to celebrate
the holidays without a lot of demonstrative hoopla? And when we say
“Merry Christmas,” aren’t we being insensitive to the individual who
has suffered a personal tragedy, such as the news that his spouse is
in possession of photographs taken by a private detective outside the
window of a Hotel 8? “Merry” indeed.
But banishing the entire phrase “Merry Christmas” still leaves the
holidays potentially hurtful as long as the callous shout, “Happy New
Year!” “Happy,” of course, is vulnerable to the same criticisms that
DQ “Merry,” but “New Year” is no innocent. It’s laden with “cultural
imperialism,” a phrase we learned long ago in college from a
professor who should be getting out of the pen any day now for
burning down the ROTC building.
Pagan-Americans, for example, typically mark their new year in the
spring. Does anyone care about them? The Jewish new year of Rosh
Hashana falls in the, well, fall, while Muslims use a different
calendar than the Gregorian version–named after a pope, no less,
which can’t sit well with Lynchburg, Va.–and, because it’s lunar,
ring in the new year on many different dates. And don’t go trying to
swap “New Year” for “2005,” Mr. Bigot. To traditional Chinese, it’s
the 22nd Year in the 78th Cycle.
Now, we’re not telling you all this to rob the season of spontaneity
or good feeling (though one’s feelings are certainly a private
affair), but only to instill in you a proper respect for your fellow
(pardon the sexist term) American. On the contrary, we shout to one
and all:
Unemotional Holiday and Disaffective Solstice!
And the Cosmic Force bless us, every one.

PRESENCE OF OPPOSITION IN ARMENIAN PARLIAMENT WILL INCREASE EFFICIENCY OF
ELABORATION AND CONSIDERATION OF BILLS: ARMENIAN PARLIAMENTARY SPEAKER
BODY:YEREVAN, DECEMBER 18. ARMINFO. Presence of the opposition in the
Armenian Parliament will increase the efficiency of elaboration and
consideration of bills, says Armenian Parliamentary Speaker Artur
Baghdasaryan in his interview with the Armenian Second TV channel
“H2.” A.Baghdasaryan is the Leader of the Orinats Yerkir party included
in the ruling coalition.
In his words, if the boycott is continued, the opposition is better
refuse from its presence in the parliament at all. Artur Baghdasaryan
thinks that this problem must be solved only through political
discussions. Finally, the people will send the MPs to the parliament,
in order that they protect its interests, first of all. There are
national problems like the peaceful resolution of Karabakh conflict
and they cannot be “favorable to the authorities and unfavorable to
the opposition or vice versa,” Baghdasaryan says.
Speaking of the domestic political situation in Armenia on the whole,
he states that it can be called stable. It is for the first time that
the political forces in the parliament has formed a coalition. Of
course, there are conflicts of opinions and approaches inside the
coalition in conditions of powerful positive potential. Of course,
there are obstacles, which can be overcome through structural reforms,
first of all. As regards the talks on the necessity of extraordinary
presidential and parliamentary elections, they are illogical from
the political point of view, he states. He assessed the activity of
the parliament in 2004 as effective as it was possible.

Kommersant, Russia
Dec 18 2004
Air Transport 2002-2004
Indicators for the Russian transportation system have steadily
improved in the last four years. For example, freight turnover
increased 7.9% compared to 2000. Last year, 285.7 million tons of
freight were shipped through Russian ports (compared to only 92.7
million tons through Baltic and Ukrainian ports). The increase in
freight volumes was mainly due to bulk cargo transport (oil and
petroleum products), which showed a 17.6% increase based on the
results of 2003 (compared to 1.5% for dry cargo).
Photo: Yury Martyanov
Indicators for air and rail transport also increased steadily,
averaging 10% per year. Domestic and international airlines carried
31 million people in 2003, which according to data of the RF State
Statistics Committee (Goskomstat) is 10.7% more than in 2002. In
2003, Russian railways transported 1.161 billion tons of freight
(7.1% more than in 2002) and 1.3 billion passengers (an increase of
2.6%).
At the same time, even according to official information, the
condition of transportation facilities and infrastructure leaves much
to be desired. For example, there are 18 291 vessels used in Russian
inland water transport but only 354 of them are less than 10 years
old. And only half of the 3830 airplanes and 1967 helicopters are
actually used. Depreciation of railway rolling stock is nearly 60%.
History: 2000–2004
During the first four years of Vladimir Putin’s presidency, many
transportation companies changed owners. Not without scandals, of
course; but these shifts essentially had no effect on the state of
the industry.
History of Aviation on the Ground
At present, there are 423 airports in Russia, almost all of them
state-owned. Despite the fact that the government promised last year
to get out of the airport business in the near future (this is
stipulated in Russia’s transportation strategy) and transfer airports
to private hands, Vladimir Putin’s first presidential term showed
that this process will be neither quick nor easy.
In June 2000, Aeroflot (51% state-owned) announced plans to construct
a third terminal at Sheremetevo International Airport (100%
state-owned). Aeroflot is Sheremetevo’s main carrier and knows better
than anyone that the airport’s traffic capacity and infrastructure
have not met real needs for a long time. However, things have not
progressed beyond leasing 50 ha of land in Khimkinsky District and a
pompous laying of the cornerstone. Aeroflot’s management and the
bureaucrats disagree on who should build the new terminal and manage
the existing one.
Last year, Alfa Group, which had previously never owned any
transportation assets, lobbied in Mikhail Kasyanov’s government for a
tender to select Sheremetevo’s management company for three years and
won it, beating out a consortium of Aeroflot and the National Reserve
Bank. At the time, Valery Okulov, Aeroflot’s general manager, even
threatened to change the company’s base airport, but the winner (OAO
Alfa Sheremetevo, 100% owned by Alfa Group affiliate Alfa-Eko M)
produced a group of foreign partners with whom it planned to tackle
Sheremetevo Airport. According to Igor Baranovsky, the head of Alfa
Sheremetevo, the amount of investment required to reconstruct and
modernize the airport and construct a third terminal is estimated at
$1.5-2 billion.
However, the tender results were not approved. Under pressure from
Aeroflot, Mikhail Fradkov’s government effectively disavowed them. In
early June, the prime minister instructed Aeroflot and Alfa Group to
reach an agreement on joint management of the airport. So far, they
have only determined the legal aspect of Aeroflot’s entry into the
management company. On July 6, Aeroflot’s board of directors approved
the following plan in principle: Alfa-Eko M and Aeroflot would set up
OOO Airport Management, to which they would transfer 100% of the
management company’s shares. The ratio of the partners’ stakes in the
new company remains an open question. The negotiations will probably
be protracted, and it is not inconceivable that the partners will use
their lobbying resources more than once to turn the situation to
their own advantage.
Vnukovo, Moscow’s third-largest airport after Sheremetevo and
Domodedovo in terms of passenger flows, was the first to actually be
privatized and was handed over by the federal authorities almost
without a fight. Until November 2003, 60.88% of the shares of AO
Vnukovo Airport (owns the Vnukovo 1 terminal) belonged to the RF
Ministry of State Property, but the Aviation Oil Company (ANK) had
actually been controlling all of Vnukovo’s airport business for a
long time. ANK refuses to disclose the ownership structure, but
according to some reports, the largest co-owners are the father and
son Anatoly and Vitaly Vantsev. The Vantsevs maintain that they only
own the manager’s block, the exact size of which is unknown.
ANK owns ZAO Vnukovo Invest [the owner of a second large block
(38.2%) of AO Vnukovo Airport], 75% of AO Vnukovo International
Airport (the remaining shares belong to the Moscow government), 60%
of ZAO Fuel Supply Complex (Toplivozapravochny kompleks;TZK), 50% of
ZAO Fuel Supply Company (Toplivozapravochnaya kompaniya), and more
than 50% of AO TZK Prima Fuel.
In April 2002, Moscow mayor Yury Luzhkov sent Vladimir Putin a
proposal to transfer shares of Vnukovo Airport against repayment of
arrears on subsidies to Moscow for carrying out its metropolitan
functions. A year later, the parties agreed in principle to transfer
the shares, worth an estimated $1.74 billion; and Vladimir Putin
signed the corresponding decree in November. According to Vitaly
Vantsev, OAO Vnukovo International Airport’s general manager, there
was no redistribution of the shares or their transfer to the
management of a single structure, as Vnukovo’s owners had originally
planned; however, OAO Vnukovo Airport was chosen as coordinator of
the modernization plan for the entire Vnukovo Airport complex with
the rank of management company. A total of $300 million is supposed
to be invested in Vnukovo by 2007 and another $200 million by 2008.
ANK also wants to buy the state-owned terminal at Sochi Airport,
where the company already has a fuel supply business. According to
Vlast’s information, the deal could be worth $70-80 million, with
provision of a further $30-40 million of investments. “This will
probably be by tender, and we’re planning to participate,” says
Vitaly Vantsev.
The Russian government’s transportation strategy assumes that
redistribution of airports will continue. Up to now, the airports
have not been separated from the 71 airlines (24 of these are joint
stock companies, and 47 are state unitary enterprises). Given that
sometimes the state owns only the runways and airport buildings but
business runs the private structures, the restructuring will not be
easy.
History of Aviation in the Air
There have been some overall changes in air traffic in the past four
years. As before, more than 200 companies are involved in this
business, but only five airlines account for half of all passenger
traffic: Aeroflot – Russian Airlines, Sibir, Pulkovo, Krasnoyarsk
Airlines, and UTair (formerly Tyumenaviatrans). Interestingly enough,
the state has stakes ranging from 25.5% to 100% in each of the five
leaders except UTair. In the experts’ estimation, this coupled with
the effect of more progressive private management has allowed the
carriers to become leaders.
Sibir, controlled by a couple from Novosibirsk, Vladislav (general
manager) and Natalya (his deputy) Filev, has been expanding its
business more aggressively than the others in the past four years.
Sibir’s expansion on the air transport market began with Vnukovo
Airlines (VAL), which was in second place in traffic volumes in the
mid-1990s, but by 2000 was virtually bankrupt. In 2001, Sibir’s
management announced the start of a merger of the companies. But when
it was discovered that VAL had debts of nearly 1 billion rubles and
creditors blocked the merger several times by legal means, Sibir
simply bought 37 of the Moscow carrier’s airplanes, which had
previously been moved to subsidiaries set up by VAL’s management.
Vnukovo Airlines was declared bankrupt in 2003.
In summer 2002, Sibir became a co-owner of Armavia Airlines founded
by a group of Armenian businessmen using leased Tu-134’s, Tu-154’s,
and a leased Airbus-A320. Sibir has still not officially confirmed
this information, calling cooperation with Armavia a “strategic
alliance”.
Finally, in May of this year, Sergei Yashin, a co-owner of
Chelyabinsk Airlines (ChAP), sold 54% of his company’s shares to
structures owned by Vladislav Filev. As a result, Sibir acquired
Chelyabinsk Airport, a fuel-supply facility, a fleet of 16 Tu-154,
Tu-134, and Yak-42 airplanes, and the means to increase passenger
flows by at least 500 000 people. Experts estimate that the deal was
worth $10 million. Yashin’s former partner and minority Chelyabinsk
Airlines shareholder, Evgeny Razumov, opposed the sale and the
arrival of new owners. The confrontation between the parties is
proceeding in the finest traditions of shareholders’ wars: reciprocal
lawsuits and seizures of Chelyabinsk Airport and the Moscow office of
ChAP subsidiary Enkor. Nevertheless, in early July, Sibir’s
management officially announced the start of operations at ChAP, and
the company has begun flights between Moscow and Chelyabinsk.
UTair, one of the world’s largest helicopter operators (184
machines), changed owners at the end of June when the Administration
of Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Area (KhMAO) and the mayor of the city of
Surgut, who owned nearly 45% of UTair’s shares, sold their holdings.
The new owner has not been disclosed, but sources closely connected
with the deal say it is the oil company Surgutneftegaz. In fact, oil
companies make up a large proportion of UTair’s clients, and the
company has a well-developed infrastructure in a number of Russian
oil towns. Aleksandr Filipenko, the governor of KhMAO, strongly
recommended to oil companies that they buy the airline. Neither UTair
nor Surgutneftegaz has officially confirmed the deal, but according
to Andrei Martirosov, the airline’s general manager, the owner is a
company “well known in the autonomous area and outside”.
History of the Ports
The last four years have been notable for the mass arrival of new
owners at Russian ports – metallurgical, oil, chemical, coal, and
even agricultural companies have bought their shares. ZAO
Severstaltrans (SST) started the trend – Aleksei Mordashov, head of
the Severstal Group, and Konstantin Nikolaev, the head of
Severstaltrans, set up the company on a parity basis in 1996. The
peak of the new transportation company’s activity happened to
coincide with the past four years.
In 2001, SST began buying up shares of OAO Eastern Port (Vostochny
port), the largest port in the Far East, which had been controlled
for eight years by American businessman Kenneth Dart and his partner
Andrew Fox (they owned 36% of the shares). By the end of the summer,
SST had acquired nearly 60% of the shares; today it controls 68.64%.
Eastern Port is fourth in Russia’s hierarchy of ports. It is located
in deep-water, ice-free Wrangel Bay in the Sea of Japan and is
capable of handling large-capacity vessels (up to 150 000 tons). The
oil company Rosneft came here in April of last year. Rosneft’s board
of directors approved the acquisition of 100% of the shares of ZAO
Eastern Oil-Loading Terminal (Vostochny neftenalivnoi terminal; VNT)
from OAO Eastern Port. The deal is worth an estimated $18 million,
and Rosneft will have to invest about another $30 million to finish
building the terminal. After commissioning the first phase of VNT,
the company plans to export up to 4.5 million tons of petroleum
products per year through it.
In January 2002, Severstaltrans was the winner at a Russian Federal
Property Fund (RFFI) auction for the sale of 34% of the shares of
Taganrog Commercial Seaport (TMTP). The company paid 75.14 billion
rubles for one-third of TMTP, one of the so-called small ports on the
Sea of Azov with potential freight turnover of 1.5 million tons per
year. As a result, Severstaltrans became the largest port owner after
the state by consolidating 39% of the shares (51% of the voting
shares). A new 400 000-ton capacity grain berth went into operation
in the same year, and construction began on three more. But at the
end of the year, Severstaltrans sold its share block to grain trader
Karavai Plus Agroindustrial Corporation (APK Karavai Plus).
This year, SST got rid of another port asset acquired two years ago.
At the end of June, the company sold 69.4% of the shares of Tuapse
Commercial Seaport [Tuapsinsky MTP, on the Black Sea] to Novolipetsk
Iron and Steel Corporation (NLMK). The amount of the deal has not
been disclosed, but analysts believe the shares cost NLMK twice as
much as Severstal, which spent about $45 million on consolidating the
shares in 2002. Severstaltrans (port assets make up a fifth of all of
the holding’s assets) explained that it had sold the shares in order
to shift money to the railway sector, specifically towards the
purchase of rolling stock and locomotives.
NLMK in turn had been the only remaining Russian metallurgical
company without its own transportation assets. However, it quickly
got down to business and bought a controlling interest in OAO Port of
St. Petersburg (Morskoi port Sankt-Peterburg) from Nasdor Anstalt
(controlled by State Duma deputy Vitaly Yuzhilin and his partner
Andrei Kobzar). The amount of the deal has not been disclosed, but
market participants estimate it was worth at least $100 million.
Other companies also became port owners between 2002 and 2004,
including Magnitogorsk Metallurgical Plant (MMK, or Magnitka), which
bought about 23% of the shares of OAO Vladivostok Commercial Seaport
(Vladivostoksky MTP), Evrazholding [owns 91.5% of the shares of
Nakhodka Commercial Seaport (Nakhodsky MTP)], Mechel [80.2% of Poset
Commercial Port (Torgovy port Poset)], and AO Alliance Oil Company
[NK Alyans; owns a 65.84% share in the capital of Nakhodka Commercial
Petroleum Port (Nakhodsky neftenalivnoi MTP)]. Norilsk Nickel
(Nornikel) increased its stake in Archangelsk Commercial Seaport
(Arkhangelsky MTP) to 53%.
History of Shipping
Of Russia’s four largest shipping companies – Novoship, Sovkomflot,
and the Primorye and Far Eastern shipping companies – only the last
two have undergone changes. In June 2002, offshore companies closely
associated with ex-Minister of Fuel and Energy and ex-State Duma
deputy Sergei Generalov consolidated a 60% block of shares of Far
Eastern Shipping Company (DVMP), which specializes in worldwide
container traffic. The shares were acquired from a number of small
private investors.
The shipping company changed its general manager in September, when
Aleksandr Ambrosov from Sovkomflot replaced government representative
Aleksandr Lugovets, who until 2000 had been the deputy of former
Minister of Transport Sergei Frank. This can be considered a defeat
for the bureaucrats, since Frank had always zealously defended the
presence of government officials in large shipping companies. At the
last shareholders’ meeting, disputes broke out between the
representatives of majority shareholder S.V.G. Holding S.A. and the
government (20%) over the amount of dividends on the results of 2003.
The government insisted on increasing them, but the principal
shareholder thought it was better to direct profits to the reserve
fund and to upgrading DVMP’s fixed assets.
Primorye Shipping Company (PMP) did not change owners. Its management
headed by Aleksandr Kirilichev, which controlled nearly 70% of the
company’s shares, tried to protect it from a hostile takeover in
January 2003. In 2003, the entire block was transferred to a nominee
holding of depositaries of ZAO ING (Eurasia) and ZAO Depositary and
Clearing Company.
Magnify
A year later, Kirilichev, who had been at the helm of PMP for more
than 10 years, also faded into the background. His first deputy,
Aleskandr Popravko, became general manager in May of this year, and
Kirilichev decided to concentrate on solving strategic problems of
expanding shipping as chairman of the board of directors. According
to Natalya Mironova, the head of PMP’s press service, the general
manager himself initiated the lateral move, because he believed that
“there are already good managers in shipping”. PMP stubbornly denies
the theory that the staff changes were made just before a major
change of owners.
Changes may also affect Sovkomflot and Novoship during Vladimir
Putin’s second presidential term. Several months ago, rumors appeared
that Sergei Frank, now an aide to the prime minister, is hatching
plans to merge the companies and is ready to head the new structure.
Of course, there is still no confirmation of this information. The
mechanism of the merger is also unclear. Unlike wholly state-owned
Sovkomflot, Novoship is only 50% state-owned.
;node=25&doc_id=492455
–Boundary_(ID_iURF6VmLC+b7gYN+yHJdyQ)–
From: Baghdasarian

Guardian, UK
Dec 18 2004
Despite this deal, the road ahead remains rocky indeed
Turkey’s bid for European membership is full of contradictions
Martin Woollacott
The European Union and Turkey took a fateful decision this week.
Unease, pride, anger and an element of guile are evident on each
side. The settlement which it brings over Cyprus – much as it is to
be desired – should not conceal from us the collisions between
different values, and between the aims of decision makers and the
instincts of their peoples, that lie ahead.
Nothing illustrated so well the disjunction between carefully
formulated common aspirations and the reality of divergent values
than the situation earlier this year. A final assessment of Turkey’s
application was being undertaken at about the same time as the
European parliament was revolting against Jose Manuel Barroso’s
choice of Rocco Buttiglione as justice commissioner. The objections
to Buttiglione were that he held traditional Catholic views on
homosexuality and the role of women. Can we imagine for a moment how
a majority of Turkish MEPs, had they been present, would have voted
on the issue?
The party from which most of them would have been drawn had just
withdrawn a proposal to criminalise adultery because it had
discovered to its surprise that the measure was offensive to the
union. Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, nevertheless made
it clear that Turkey had no intention of trading its social and
cultural values for EU membership. And why should he not do so, as a
conservative Muslim? Yet the same MEPs who were outraged by
Buttiglione’s views have now voted for accession negotiations with
Turkey to begin. They are either oblivious to contradiction, or they
conceive of the negotiations as a project to transform Turkey into a
country happy to be in the close company of a Britain soon to abolish
the blasphemy laws, or a Spain moving to endorse gay marriage.
That may happen. After all, 30 years ago Spain, Italy, and Ireland,
to take just three examples, were societies that appeared to be
deeply religious, and they appear much less so today. But that does
not mean Turkey will go in the same direction, and it is not the
direction in which Erdogan and his Justice and Development party, the
AKP, wish to take their country.
When the AKP’s predecessor, the Welfare party, came to power in 1996,
a party journal declared: “For almost a century, the foes of Islam
have governed Turkey. Now a new period begins.” Erdogan clearly has
no intention of confronting the Kemalist division between religion
and the state, but a shift of power toward the religious and, in
particular, toward the religiously educated has been obvious in
Turkey for at least the past 10 years.
The irony is that the European political forces opposed to Turkey’s
entry because it is Muslim are precisely those likely to be in broad
agreement with the conservative social views of Erdogan and his
party, and with their conviction of the centrality of religious
faith. Equally, the political forces in Europe most in favour of
Turkish entry are the left and liberal groups least likely to share
such views.
Surely there are grounds for trouble here. The stage is set for a
struggle in which Turkey, at least as long as the AKP is in charge,
tries to take from Europe what it wants in terms of economic and
security advantage, and tries to change what it deems essential as
little as possible – while Europe demands its pound of liberal flesh.
It is not only religious values that will be at issue, but deeply
established habits of Turkish nationalism, such as the denial that
anything happened to the Armenians worse than the general suffering
of all the peoples affected by the collapse of the Ottoman empire – a
position that must surely change before Turks can claim to have
purged themselves of past sins.
On the surface, there seems to be a sharp contrast between European
public opinion, in the main dubious about Turkish entry, and Turkish
public opinion, strongly in favour. But if you go deeper, the
asymmetry is not so obvious. It can be argued that Europe is a
curiously unifying factor in Turkey only because so many different,
competing and sometimes mutually hostile groups see it as a solution
to their problems, a way to move on the long game of modern Turkish
politics in their favour.
For ethnic minorities such as the Kurds, and religious minorities
such as Orthodox Christians, Europe could provide a guarantee of
secure minority status, even autonomy. For the business class, at
least the upper tier of it, the present arrangements with the union
have already brought benefits, and more are in prospect. For those
sections of the working class in western Turkey, which already have
strong European connections, full EU membership would make easier the
dual existence that is already a reality for their families.
For Turkish liberals Europe is a hedge against both religious
extremism and secular authoritarianism. For the armed forces, uneasy
about American policy in the Middle East, Europe may represent a way
of reducing its US links. And, very important, for Turkey’s
decision-makers, who worry about population growth, unemployment and
what will happen to the rural masses, Europe is the only visible
answer.
For the Turkish political class, moreover, Europe was a policy that,
pursued in the right way, could bring permanent advantage to the
party that brought home the prize. Against the expectations of only a
few years ago, it is the Islamic party that seems closest to this
goal. Having for years opposed entry and talked about an Islamic
common market as an alternative, it shrewdly stole the European
clothes of the secular parties and presented itself to the electorate
as able both to maintain traditional and religious values and to reel
in what Europe had to offer. Its coup has, however, put it in an
exposed position, for it must now deliver this contradictory package.
It has also left the Turkish party system in a state of disarray,
which is not often noted in discussions of Turkish democracy.
There are Turks who feel strongly European, and there is a true
European sense in some classes in that country. But “If not Europe,
what?” calculations, and a prickly “We’re as good as you” sentiment
also mark the Turkish approach. This latter feeling appears to have
ruled out the halfway house of a special relationship. Thus Turkey is
embracing Europe less in enthusiasm than with a mix of pride and
desperation, while Europe is embracing Turkey with reluctance and a
degree of fear. Not fear of Turkey, but of its own population,
because there is no getting away from the fact that this will be
another big thing the European elite has done that its peoples on the
whole do not want.
The ways in which, through lost referendums and other national votes,
this could damage the European project are clear enough. A rocky road
indeed.

Roj TV, Denmark
Dec 18 2004
French President Chirac interprets the summit and Kurdish Problem
French President Jacques Chirac stating he expected the candidacy of
Turkey to the European Union (EU) would bring the principles of
peace, dialog and especially respect with, interpreted the given date
for negotiations as “If we remain engage for 15 years, this will
result in a happy marriage.”
In a press conference held in Brussels, Jacques Chirac , the
president of France where was on the focus of the most intensive
debates before the Oct. 17 summit of the EU, made crucial statements
on the given date for starting talks, Cyprus and Kurdish problems. He
emphasized that the date to be handed to Turkey does not mean
candidateship and, gave the message Turkey should make great attempts
to access to the European community. If Turkey does not make the
required efforts and the unity decrees Turkey not to have done or not
to want to do so, the EU will stand on a strong formula of
relationship out of candidacy.” President Chirac said and stated the
way of parley was ”long and hard”.
‘Turkey has many steps to take”
To question ”Will you make a call on Turkey, which has been fighting
with Kurdish guerillas for 30 years, to start a dialog with the
Kurdish side”, Mr.Chirac said the problem would be solved within the
framework of Copenhagen Criteria. Taking attention to the existence
of the Criteria which point out respect for human rights, the French
President said: ”This should be implemented into practice for the
Kurds, as should for the others. These criteria to be imbibed by
Turkey will bring forth effects especially for the Kurds, too. One of
the important problems is deliberation. If we believe the conditions
of respect for human rights not to be fulfilled, this should be
imposed upon ”He expressed that Turkey had many steps to take on
that way, and warned the Turkish state that the debate will be
stopped in case of Turkey violated human right.” To enter this
culture is needed. I hope the negotiations and the candidateship of
Turkey bring the principles of peace, dialog and particularly respect
with it. We call this Copenhagen Criteria, which will open the way of
peace and dialog.” he added.
If Cyprius is not recognized, the talks end’
By stating that Turkey was ready for signing the protocol related
with the Ankara Agreement on the Cyprus Issue, Chirac emphasized the
negotiations would end in case Cyprus was not recognized. He
expressed a wish of marriage between the Turkish state and the EU by
saying :” If we stay engaged for 15 years, I believe, this will lead
up to a marriage.”
‘France is very sensitive about Armenians subject’
The president answering a question stated France was very sensitive
especially about the Armenian problem and said that France opened its
gates to Armenians in 1915 and there is an Armenian society
well-integrated with the state. He also recorded that Turkey should
have made a memorial examination on Armenian issue, otherwise Turkey
would incur an intervention of the French people in the referendum to
be held for the candidacy of Turkey to the EU.

RECOVERY OF POPULATION’S SOVIET TIME SAVINGS IS MORAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC PROBLEM
YEREVAN, DECEMBER 18. ARMINFO. The recovery of the population’s
Soviet times savings is a moral, social and economic problem, says
Artak Arakelyan, MP representing the State of Law party.
“We owe money to those who built the country that was successfully
destroyed later. Even though we have been taught how to cheat in the
past years the money should still be returned,” says Arakelyan.
He notes that nobody pressured him and some other MPs to collect
signatures for calling a special session on the issue. He says that his
party drafted such a bill as early as 2000 but it has never reached the
parliamentary floor. Now the parliament has to consider three bills at
a time. “We should find an optimal solution,” says Arakelyan. He calls
a bluff the talk that WB and other international financial institutions
may refuse Armenia further financing if the savings are returned.
Arakelyan is sure that this issue will cause no split inside the
ruling coalition but regrets that socially oriented ARFD objects to
returning people their own money. Let them come and vote against rater
than deliberately boycott the session, he says. As for the Republican
Party’s skepticism Arakelyan calls it political jealousy.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress