WAM – Emirates News Agency, United Arab Emirates
Oct 1 2005
Armenian embassy’s building to be constructed in UAE
Oct 1, 2005 – 11:05 –
Abu Dhabi 1 October, 2005 (WAM)–The foundation stone for the first
Armenian embassy’s building in the UAE, was laid down today by the
Armenian Minister of Foreign Affaires, Vartan Oskanian, who was
accompanied by Abdullah Rashid Al Nuaimi , Director of Protocol in
the UAE Ministry of Foreign Affaires and Arshak Poladian, Armenian
ambassador to the UAE.
Oskanian lauded the wise leadership of President H.H. Sheikh Khalifa
bin Zayed Al Nahyan as well as UAE-Armenia ties of cooperation, which
he described as ” continually growing”.
He said the forthcoming structure would be the first Armenian
building the entire Gulf region and would be considered a symbol of
cooperation and fraternity between the UAE and Armenia.
The ceremony was attended by heads of Arab and foreign diplomatic
missions in the country and members of the Armenian community.

Sify, India
Oct 2 2005
Turkey in EU would help the Muslim world: analysts

Sunday, 02 October , 2005, 08:19

Amman: Arab countries believe Turkey entering the European Union
would strengthen their own relations with Europe and bolster efforts
to portray Islam as a moderate religion, analysts say.
“Turkey’s negotiations with the European Union are a sign of
encouragement,” said Fares Braizat, a researcher at the Centre of
Strategic Studies of the University of Jordan.
“For the Arabs it means that Turkey could play a play a significant
role within the European Union regarding EU policies towards the Arab
and Muslim regions,’ he said. `Turkey is seen as a model for positive
engagement with the world.”
With one foot firmly planted in the east and the other in the west,
Turkey is seen by other Muslim countries as a role model that has
successfully balanced tradition and modernisation.
“The Arabs look up to Turkey as a model for bringing modernisation
and democracy,” Braizat said.
“This could inspire Arab countries that if you introduce democratic
reforms, it would mean you have the advantage of being considered for
a better partnership with the European Union,” he added.
A Muslim but secular state of 70 million people, Turkey is due to
begin accession talks on Monday with a Europe whose history and
culture are broadly Christian, but where the influence of that faith
is waning.
The entry of a “Muslim country into a Christian club will be
beneficial for both parties”, said Qatari analyst Abdelhamid
al-Ansari.
The move is expected to trigger economic dividends for Ankara and
help Turkey “rationalise its policies”, said Ansari, a former dean of
theology at Doha University.
“Ankara appears more apt at admitting the Armenian genocide and at
recognising Cyprus, but also in dealing well with its minorities such
as the Kurds,” he said, listing the three thorny issues standing in
the way of Turkey’s EU membership.
By accepting Turkey, “the EU will be shedding its ‘Christian club’
label, improving Europe’s image in the Muslim world and encouraging
Turkey’s model – a moderate Islamic state which is also a democracy,”
Ansari said.
“This would help moderates and liberals across the Muslim world to
confront Islamic extremism.”
Turkey’s neighbour Syria, which is facing harsh criticism from
Washington over its alleged failure to prevent the infiltration of
militants and weapons into Iraq, is crossing its fingers that Ankara
will be admitted into the EU.
“Turkey’s membership is important for Syria because it will become
Europe’s direct neighbour,” said Elias Murad, the chief editor of
Al-Baath, the ruling party’s newspaper.
“This will contribute to improve political and economic relations
with the EU,” Murad said.
Syria had to pull troops out of Lebanon in April under heavy
international pressure, ending nearly three decades of military and
political domination of its smaller neighbour.
In July, European Union foreign ministers urged Syria to support the
new government in Lebanon and stop backing groups that oppose moves
to establish peace in the Middle East
“A positive Syrian contribution to regional stability would
contribute to deepening the EU-Syria relationship,” a statement said.
Lebanon also believes Turkey should be admitted to the EU.
“Turkey should not be excluded because it is a Muslim country,” an
official source said.
“Turkey’s admission into the EU will have a positive impact on
international cooperation and will be beneficial for Lebanon,” the
source said.

The Daily Telegraph, UK
Oct 2 2005
A cynical comedy that is likely to end in ironic tragedy
By Daniel Hannan
(Filed: 02/10/2005)
An elaborate farce will be played out in Luxembourg tomorrow. Barring
a last-minute diplomatic hitch, Turkey will formally begin the
process of accession to the European Union. Politicians from around
Europe will make speeches about how much the EU will gain from
Turkish membership and vice versa. But few of them will believe what
they are saying.
Indeed, almost the only people who are taking the EU at its word are
the Turks themselves. Unaccustomed to the way of doing business in
Brussels, they innocently believe the promise made by the existing
members last December that Turkey would be admitted once it had met
certain criteria. Since then, the EU has been shaken by the French
and Dutch No votes on the constitution – results that the Eurocrats
blame chiefly on anti-Turkish feeling. France and Austria have
responded by promising to hold referendums on Turkish membership.
Seventy per cent of Frenchmen and 80 per cent of Austrians plan to
vote No, and it takes only one veto to block the application.
Yet the Turks remain blissfully optimistic. The European Parliament
was swarming with them last week, polite men in spectacles and dapper
suits. I fell into conversation with one, an MP from the ruling
party, in a bar. “Come off it,” I told him. “It’s never going to
happen, is it? I mean, look at what this Austrian chap, Schüssel, is
telling his voters: that you can’t come in because no one wants to
pay for you.”
My Turkish friend smiled gently. “Das ist für die Gasse,” he said. It
was a clever answer. The phrase, which roughly translates as “that’s
for the gutter”, was used in the 1920s by a previous Austrian
chancellor, Ignaz Seipel, to describe the anti-Semitism that his
party preached but never practised. By quoting it, the Turkish MP was
at once signalling his familiarity with European history and
delivering a neat put-down to Mr Schüssel.
My friend’s European outlook is not surprising: like many Turks, his
ancestors had fled the Balkans with the Ottoman janissaries. As we
spoke, I kept thinking how much more urbane he and his colleagues
were than many of the MEPs already here. Spend a day in Strasbourg
and you will come across religious fundamentalists, unapologetic
Stalinists, nutty monarchist parties. You will find fascists,
indicted criminals, apologists for the IRA. Yet these same MEPs
presume to treat the Turks like half-civilised brutes.
Last Wednesday, my colleagues insisted that, before it is allowed in,
Turkey acknowledge its role in the Armenian massacres of 1915 and
recognise the Greek Cypriot administration’s jurisdiction over the
whole island. No other country has had such conditions attached to
its membership. No one demanded that, say, Belgium come clean about
its atrocities in the Congo. And asking Ankara to make further
concessions when it was the Turkish Cypriots who accepted the EU’s
reunification plan and the Greeks who rejected it seems grotesquely
unfair.
Ah, you say, but these are Western Turks. Behind them stand hordes of
Anatolian peasants, barely literate and vulnerable to Islamism. After
all, haven’t they just voted for a religious party? This is a strange
criticism. For years, the West has been lecturing Ankara about its
illiberal attitude to religious pluralism. Now, when Turkey finally
rescinds some of its most oppressive anti-clerical laws, we throw our
hands in the air and shriek about fundamentalism. The funny thing is
that we risk creating the very thing we fear: a Turkey oriented
towards Mecca. Refusing the Turks now would be one thing. But
stringing them along for another 10 years, extracting humiliating
concessions, making them assimilate hundreds of thousands of EU laws
and then, after all this, turning them away – that would be
calamitous. Today, Turkey is an inspiration to Muslims everywhere who
believe in democracy. Ten years from now, we may have turned a loyal
ally into a snarling rival, an Iran on our doorstep. We are stumbling
towards a truly epochal mistake.
– Daniel Hannan is a Conservative MEP

Turkish Press
Oct 2 2005
New Legislation Year Starts

ARINC DRAWS ATTENTION TO CRITICAL DAYS IN TURKEY’S EU BID
ANKARA – Turkish Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc said on Saturday
that Turkey had its most critical days regarding its EU bid, adding
”Europe is being tested for honesty, equity and objectivity. We see
and denounce those who try to impede Turkey’s membership to the EU by
taking some political maneuvers.”
The new parliamentary term started the same day and the parliamentary
general assembly convened under the leadership of Arinc.
Addressing the parliament, Arinc said that Turkey would not cope with
terrorism by restricting freedoms. ”This parliament should give the
best response to terrorism by staying in solidarity,” Arinc said.
Referring to Turkey’s EU bid, Arinc said that the Turkish people had
difficulty in understanding the hypocrisy shown by EU towards Turkey.
Arinc stressed that Turkey was a big state and it had the power to
change some balances, adding that Europe was on the eve of taking an
important decision.
”Europe will either accept our membership, adapt itself to the
change in the world and get stronger or will impede our membership by
looking inwards and loose its impact on world politics. Turkey’s
membership means the integration of the east and the west and the
meeting of civilizations,” Arinc said.
Denouncing the attempt to bring claims like Armenian genocide onto
the agenda prior to Oct. 3rd, Arinc said that the Turkish parliament
would not accept a crime which its ancestors didn’t commit just to be
a member of the European Union.

Anatolian Times, Turkey
Oct 2 2005
Sezer: Turkey Will Contribute To E.U. With Its Sound Economy
ANKARA – Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer has indicated, ”it is
obvious that Turkey will contribute to the European Union (EU) with
its sound economy. We hope EU countries to take into consideration
this fact.”
The new parliamentary term started with the opening remarks of Sezer
in the parliament today.
Sezer stressed, ”Turkish parliament is one of the most important
guaranties of the Republic today, as it was in the past.”
-EU-
Sezer said that Europe-Atlantic link constituted an important
dimension of Turkish foreign policy, noting, ”within this framework,
Turkey’s EU process, the country’s relations with the United States
and our position in NATO are primary items of the country’s foreign
policy agenda.”
Noting that it was foreseen that Turkey would start officially
membership negotiations with the EU two days later, Sezer said that
there were still some uncertainties on some points, although there
was little time left for start of membership talks (scheduled to
start on October 3rd). He indicated that it was not easy to reach
this stage, adding that it was obvious that the following process
would not be easy, either.
Sezer said that Turkish nation would not accept additional
conditions, noting, ”the process has started and no backward step
should be taken. Turkey is determined to be a full member of the EU
and it will complete this process by protecting its national
interests and national honor. If this process is delayed, Europe will
lose much more than Turkey. Because Turkey is determined to upgrade
living standards of its people.”
”Turkey which adopted contemporary and universal values fulfilled
its responsibilities on its road to the EU. No one will benefit from
prejudices,” he stressed.
Sezer stated that Turkey aimed to reach EU criteria also in
education, noting that the period of obligatory education should be
increased to 12 years.
-”TERROR DOES NOT HAVE RELIGION OR NATIONALITY”-
Stressing that terrorism with its global dimension became primary
threat against world peace and stability, Sezer said, ”terror does
not have geography, religion or nationality.”
Sezer said that there was a global fight against terrorism, stating
that there should be international cooperation in fight against it.
He underlined that Turkey was against every kind of terror.
Sezer indicated that presence of terrorist organization PKK in the
north of Iraq was an unacceptable situation for Turkey, stating that
they thought that this situation was known by Iraqi and the U.S.
administrations.
”We are determined to take necessary measures in our borders. Its
(terrorist organization’s) components in Iraq should also be cleared
to eliminate terrorist organization completely. We expect relevant
parties to take into consideration our concerns on this issue,”
Sezer underlined.
-ECONOMY-
Noting that there have been pleasing developments in Turkish economy
recently, Sezer stated that growth rate became 9.9 percent last year
and gross national product per capita increased to 4.172 USD.
Sezer underlined that positive developments in the economy also
continued in 2005, adding that yet unemployment was still a problem.
He stressed that measures should be taken to increase employment
opportunities as soon as possible.
Sezer said that new technology, new investment and new employment
opportunities should be created during privatization process.
-UNITED STATES-
Sezer said, ”another issue which we attach importance besides EU is
relations with the United States. Relations with the EU and the
United States are completing each other. Turkey-U.S. relations
include all elements which a strong partnership necessitates. The two
countries act with common understanding in many issues like fight
against terrorism, solution of Arab-Israel clash, settlement of
stability in Caucasia and Central Asia as well as solution of Cyprus
question. NATO is also an important corner stone in cooperation
between Turkey and the U.S.”
-GREECE-
”The basis in relations with neighbors is stability and harmony. We
have the will to develop our relations with Greece on the basis of
mutual respect, confidence and friendship. We wish Greece to continue
its efforts to show the same will and to protect dialogue milieu.
Developments in relations ease solution of bilateral problems. Such a
development is beneficial not only for Turkey and Greece but also for
the region,” said Sezer.
-CYPRUS-
Sezer noted, ”regarding Cyprus issue, Turkish side exerted efforts
for solution. However, Greek Cypriot side, under the directions of
their administrators, rejected lasting solution as well as Annan
Plan. Greek Cypriot side is allowed to use EU membership as a force
of sanction against Turkey, and also isolation over Turkish Cypriots
continues, and these are not just. We see that Greek Cypriot side is
not willing for solution. The only reason for this is that Greek
Cypriot administration is not forced for solution. Its EU membership
is the most tangible example of that.”
-BALKANS-
”Turkey attaches great importance to protection of stability in the
Balkans. We will continue to support reconstruction and development
activities of some Balkan countries and to protect peace in the
region. Also, we hope Greek government will act with responsibility
for solution of problems of our kinsmen in western Thrace,” said
Sezer.
-RUSSIA-
Sezer noted, ”Russian Federation is one of the key countries of
Eurasian region. Relations between Turkey and Russian Federation,
which are two important countries of Black Sea region, have developed
in recent period. Potential in mutual commerce and tourism is
significant. Our relations are further deepened through high-level
visits as well as bilateral, regional and international policies.”
-EURASIA-
”Eurasia is also important in Turkey’s multilateral foreign policy.
Unity of Europe and Asia through energy and transportation corridors
as well as creating a new momentum for economic growth are basis of
Turkey’s stance towards Eurasia. Turkey has close relations with
Azerbaijan and Georgia,” said Sezer.
-ARMENIA-
Sezer said, ”Armenia’s stance towards its relations with neighbors
(…) –despite the basic principles of international law and good
neighborhood– has become an obstacle to develop our relations with
Armenia. Upper Karabakh and Abkhazia problems are main obstacles
before peace and stability of southern Caucasia. Peaceful solution to
these problems will contribute to settlement of political stability
in the region. Turkey tries to make every type of contribution to
this issue. Upper Karabakh problem which emerged after Armenia’s
occupation of Azerbaijani land should be solved. Turkey is ready to
support a solution which will be accepted by both sides regarding
Upper Karabakh problem.”
-IRAQ-
”We believe that only an equal government structure without making
any discrimination among different religions, sects and ethnic in
Iraq can be successful in Iraq,” said Sezer. Turkey’s intense
dialogue with all sections of Iraq would continue in order to
contribute to preparation of the Iraqi constitution, he added.
-KIRKUK-
Sezer said that Iraqis, themselves, should determine the future of
Kirkuk city in Iraq, stressing that if any group tries to claim
ownership over the city this would lead to an ethnic chaos and
regional instability. Turkey could not stay indifferent in that
respect, Sezer said.
-LASTING PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST-
President Sezer stressed that Turkey was ready to extend all sorts of
aid to conflicting sides in the region particularly for settlement of
Palestine-Israeli conflict.
-AFGHANISTAN HAS SPECIAL IMPORTANCE-
Turkey also attributed importance to Central Asian countries, Sezer
said noting that ”Afghanistan has special importance for Turkey due
to historical ties.” Turkey extended full support to Afghanistan’s
reconstruction and it also commanded ISAF twice, he noted.
-RELATIONS WITH ASIA-PACIFIC COUNTRIES-
President Sezer also referred to the importance of developing
relations with Asia-Pacific countries particularly with Japan and
China and stressed that Turkey’s function would be very critical in
respect of connection of Asia and Europe by energy corridors,
railways and highways and for creating new regional dynamics.
-TURKEY’S GOALS-
Sezer also mentioned some of the goals of Turkey:”being a member of
the European Union (EU), strengthening the position of being a
regional power and also becoming a global power, being among the ten
biggest economies of the world with a sustainable development,
becoming an information society, being among the leading countries of
the world in science and technology and protecting the power of the
Turkish Armed Forces.”
Referring to some difficulties on the way to reach these goals, Sezer
said that ”we must increase our sensitivity towards the chaos and
tension caused by separatist terrorism and fundamentalism in the
society and don’t allow them to threaten the internal peace. We
should deal with this problem by having a national security
understanding.”
Sezer added that Turkey wanted to improve its relations with all of
its neighbours in a positive way.

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 2 2005
Turkey and EU: One More Push!
View: Selcuk GULTASLI
The rule that “every draft the EU prepares about Turkey does not get
its final form without getting toughened’ did not change. Where did
the Cyprus declaration begin, and where did it end? The EU virtually
said to the Greek Cypriots “Write it down, we will put a signature on
it.”
The declaration for which the Greek Cypriots, with the support of the
French, took EU as hostage turned out to be a legally binding paper
despite the British rhetoric that “it is not a legally binding
document and will be forgotten within six months, why give a damn?”
Moreover, even if the EU does ever forget something, it will be
decisions for the benefit of Turkey. The commitment givenby Greece
back in 1981 that she would not interfere in Turkey-EU relations, the
declaration from France, Germany, Netherlands and Italy in 1998
declaring that “the Greek Cypriots will not become a member of the EU
before a solution is reached in Cyprus”, the Council’s decisions that
will bring an end to the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots in 2004
were all too easily forgotten.
The framework document is also becoming more stringent. It has not
yet been approved, and it probably won’t be until the last days and
many elements -excluding the privileged partnership that Turkey
cannot accept- will be introduced into this document.
The situation is as follows: Those who had been promised for 46 years
will announce their engagement on October 3. The EU part does all it
can to ensure that the engagement will not end up with a marriage. It
will sit at the table of engagement, just because it promised once,
but it prepares many pretexts in order to toss the ring away just
after the engagement. Turkey, too, is not happy as it sits at the
table, she is convinced that the EU is unwillingly sitting at the
table. In this case, almost everybody foresees that the negotiations
will fail to continue even if they do start on October 3 and that
this will halt, anyway, in 2006 when the additional protocol is
revised.
The EU made the negotiations “unsustainable” with the declaration of
Cyprus, and allowed the UN ground for a possible solution to erode
and most importantly confirmed that it now sees the issue from a
Greek Cypriot view. From now on, in the Cyprus issue the EU cannot go
beyond the parameters cited in the declaration. The Greek Cypriots
will get what they want unless the political atmosphere in Europe
goes through a radical change-which is impossible in the short term.
The next crisis pending between the EU and Turkey is the additional
protocol waiting to be approved in the Assembly. As the screening
process will start on October 3, negotiations will most probably
start at the end of the term presidency of the UK, namely in
December.
And in the worst case scenario, the start of negotiations will take
place following the scanning process and this will happen in the term
presidency of Austria. There is no need to offer any detailed
explanation of how Austria, which has the hysteria that the Turks
besieged Vienna for the third time, will approach the negotiations.
As the Greek Cypriots will ask the additional protocol to be approved
and implemented immediately after October 3, Turkey will face a
serious dilemma before it can even start the real negotiations.
As the opponents in Europe have plenty of supporters in Turkey,
sabotaging the negotiations will become easier. The guardians of the
established system whose entire comfort will be overwhelmed with the
start of negotiations will clearly show their European allies that
“Turkey has not changed” with a few provocations just as happened at
the Armenian conference. And in the words of Fuat Pasha that are even
more relevant today, `They from the outside, we from the inside,
together’ will obstruct the start of negotiations! Come on guys!

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 2 2005
42-Year Old EU Journey at Critical Crossroads
By ALI IHSAN AYDIN
Turkey’s European Union (EU) journey began with the Ankara agreement
signed in 1963. If accession negotiations begin on October 3, the
long period of “promise for marriage” without engagement will finally
be concluded.
The engagement period, which is predicted to last 10 to 15 years,
will begin, but no one knows whether this process will end in
marriage. Ankara says, “Let’s not water down business from the start;
engagement is for marriage.” EU is confused. It wants to insert the
condition, “Let’s remain friends if we do not marry” to the treaty.
The relations were frozen following the coup
Turkey, which preferred to stand with the West in regards to its
foreign policy following the World War II by becoming a member of the
European Council in 1949 and of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) in 1952, applied to the European Economic
Community (EEC) for membership in 1959, during the premiership of
Adnan Menderes.
The EEC accepted the membership applications of Ankara and Athens in
the same year. The Ankara treaty, which is considered to be the
starting point of Turkey-EU relations, was signed three years later,
in 1963.
The Treaty, seen as a mark of Europe’s positive answer towards
Turkey’s marriage offer, envisaged a three-staged process of
preparation, transition and conclusion. Turkey would become a member
of the EEC only after passing through these stages.
Turkey could complete the transition period, which began with the
Value Added Protocol signed in 1973, with a 10 years delay, in 1995.
According to the Ankara Agreement, the transition period could last
up to 12 years. The relations with the EEC followed a path with ups
and downs bearing on the political developments in Turkey. EEC
decided to freeze its relations with Turkey on 22 January 1982,
following the military coup in Turkey.
Ozal’s demand satisfied in 1999
In the meantime, Greece, which had applied for EEC membership
together with Turkey in 1959, obtained full membership in 1981.
Three years before Greece was accepted, EEC called Turkey to
immediately file an application for full membership. However, Bulent
Ecevit, the Prime Minister of the period, declined the offer,
addressing the EEC representative who came to communicate the
invitation with: “We do not think to enter the EEC. For, if we enter
the EEC we will become your market. Our economy cannot stand this
partnership.”
Ankara made its application to the union for full membership in 1987
during the prime ministry of Turgut Ozal. However, the European
Commission (EC) rejected Turkey’s application in 1989 on the grounds
that the EEC could not accept it as a new member until it created its
own internal market.
Turkey continued to knock on EU’s door in the following years and
accomplished the 22 year period of transition on its way towards the
EU with the Customs Union Agreement in 1995 and started the final
period. The only target forTurkey from then on has been full
membership, which was also a target in the Ankara Agreement.
Turkey’s manner reflected
The EU announced Slovakia, Poland, Romania, Slovenia, Bulgaria,
Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and the Greek Cyprus as candidate
countries in the summit of presidents and the prime ministers in
Luxembourg in 1997. However, it did not give the candidacy status to
Turkey. In the summit, it simply noted Turkey was able to become a
candidate. As a response to this decision, Ankara suspended its
political relations with the EU.
The EU summit on 10-11 December 1999 in Helsinki started a new period
for EU-Turkey relations.
Turkey was accepted as a candidate in the summit. However, it is
noted that there were several reforms that Turkey had to accomplish
before becoming a member of the EU. Turkey started an expansive
reform process after the summit in order to accomplish the EU
criteria and has been continuing this process ever since. The
coalition government under the prime ministry of Ecevit abolished the
death penalty in 2002 as a historic step towards the EU. The
Copenhagen Summit on 12-13 December 2002 moved Turkey closer to the
EU. The council finally decided that negotiations would start without
any delays if Turkey accomplished the Copenhagen political criteria
by the December 2004 Summit. The Summit also decided that 10 new
candidates including Greek Cyprus would be members of the EU on 1 May
2004. As Greek Cyprus became a member of the EU, the, principle that
countries with boundary problems cannot be members of the EU was
violated.
December 17: Maddening night
The Justice and Development Party (AKP) government, that took office
in November 2002, showed great determination in the EU proccess and
passed the reform packages, which enabled Turkey to accomplish the
Copenhagen Criteria.. The European Commission noted on 6 October 2004
that Turkey fulfilled the political criteria and advised that the
negotiations should start.
The European Council (EC) decided on 17 December 2004 in Brussels on
the recommendation of the Commission that Turkey’s full-membership
negotiations should begin on 3 October 2005. The Council, however,
stipulated that Turkey must sign the Additional Protocol, which
extends the Customs Union Agreement to the new ten countries
including Greek Cypriots. The summit saw some crisis for a while due
to the fact that some members tried to win further concessions from
Turkey. The Turkish group, under the leadership of Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, set forth their final opinion in
scathing terms and left the room. British Prime Minister Tony Blair
managed to convince Erdogan to return to the meeting.
Last minute again, war of nerves again
Turkey signed the Additional Protocol on 29 July 2005, which
stipulated that the Customs Union should cover the 10 new European
Union (EU) member countries. Ankara issued a declaration saying that
the signing of the protocol does not mean the recognition of the
Greek Cypriots. As France showed a huge reaction to the declaration,
French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin just emphasized the need
for Turkey to recognize the Greek Cypriots in order to be part of the
EU. The European Council did not, however, specify that Turkey’s
recognition of the Greek Cypriots was a prerequisite for the
negotiations, but the pressure on Turkey just began to increase. The
EU decided to publish a “counter declaration” in response to Turkey’s
refusal to acknowledge the Greek Cypriots. The EU member countries
had difficulty in reaching an absolute agreement about the counter
declaration, which specifies that Turkey should allow the Greek
Cypriots to use airports and seaports. Twenty-five EU member
countries were also unable to reach a definite agreement on “The
Framework Document”, which is intended to be a set of specifications
of the negotiations. The reason for the lack of agreement between
these countries resulted from Austria’s proposal of privileged
partnership. It is argued that Austria intended this proposal in
order to make it possible for Croatia to resume its previously
suspended negotiations. The EU Public Works Council will meet on
Sunday October 2 in Luxemburg to approve the Framework Document. The
document discloses that Turkey will not be eligible for a
full-membership before 2014 and the negotiations are open-ended.
Turkish officials refuse to go to Luxemburg as long as the content of
the Framework Document is unclear, adding that Turkey will not agree
to any option other than full-membership.
On the other hand, the EP took a decision at the general meeting on
September 28 in Luxemburg to postpone the approval of the Additional
Protocol to a later date, asking Turkey to acknowledge the so-called
‘Armenian genocide’.

Pittsburgh Post Gazette, PA
Oct 2 2005
Do Turks want the EU, and does EU want them?
Sunday, October 02, 2005
By Karl Vick, The Washington Post
ISTANBUL, Turkey — The exhibit opened 50 years to the day after the
mayhem it chronicled in the cobblestone street right outside the
gallery.
Captured on black-and-white glossies was a modern-day pogrom, a
massive, state-sponsored assault on a foreign community that awoke on
the morning of Sept. 6, 1955, still feeling safe in Istanbul. By
sunset a day later, a mob of perhaps 100,000 Turks had attacked
foreigners’ homes, schools and churches, and filled whole streets
with the contents of the ruined shops that lined them. In the
aftermath of the attack, a city for centuries renowned for its
diversity steadily purged itself of almost everyone who could not
claim to be Turkish.
The exhibit at Karsi Artworks attempts to confront that history,
dubbed the Events of Sept. 6-7, in the era before “ethnic cleansing”
entered the popular lexicon. But when ultranationalist thugs swarmed
into the gallery on opening night — throwing eggs, tearing down
photos and chanting “Love it or leave it!” — the question became
whether it really is history at all.
“Just like what happened 50 years ago,” said Mahmut Erol Celik, a
retired civil servant emerging from the defaced exhibit. “It’s the
same mentality. That’s what’s so embarrassing.”
Appearances have lately counted for a lot in Turkey. Under intense
international scrutiny, its government hopes to begin negotiations
Oct. 3 that should conclude with Turkey as a member of the European
Union. Even if the process takes 15 years, as many predict, the
result would apparently fulfill an ambition such as that which drove
modern Turkey’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who preached that the
country’s future lay firmly with the West.
But questions arise almost daily about whether either side wants to
proceed. Europe’s mixed feelings about absorbing Turkey’s large, poor
and overwhelmingly Muslim population are well known. But Turkey
harbors its own ambivalence, apparently rooted in the recurring
question of how much the country cares about the world beyond its own
borders.
That question came up again this month, when a Turkish court made
headlines by barring a handful of scholars from gathering to discuss
the deaths in 1915 of perhaps a million ethnic Armenians, in
circumstances that Armenia and many independent scholars describe as
genocide but Turkey calls the consequences of war.
The disagreement has poisoned relations between the neighboring
nations for decades with an obsessiveness that overtakes Turkish
efforts to appear poised. This summer, readers of Time magazine’s
international edition found a DVD tucked into a four-page ad for
Turkish tourism. The disc included 13 minutes of commercials and an
hour-long propaganda film accusing Armenians of slaughtering Turks.
“It’s not a polemic,” said a spokeswoman for the Ankara Chamber of
Commerce, which paid for the disorienting mix of polished commercials
and grainy footage of dead bodies. “We just wanted to position Turkey
on this issue.”
Last May, the prospect of scholars gathering for an independent
assessment of the controversy brought a chilling warning from
Turkey’s justice minister, who called them “traitors.” After
objections from the EU, the scrapped conference was rescheduled and
was finally held this past month, but not without an accompanying
demonstration by Turkish nationalists.
“There is no other country which harms its own interests this much,”
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said.
But then few other countries are so nationalistic. Turks are raised
to believe that Turkey is surrounded by enemies and can rely only on
itself. The unitary notion of the state views all citizens as ethnic
Turks and regards any other presence as a dire threat.

WebIndia, India
Oct 2 2005
Genocide? Turkey’s last Armenian village unmoved
Vakifli Turkey | October 02, 2005 9:31:51 AM IST

The European Parliament might want Turkey to recognise a 1915
massacre of Armenians as genocide, but the people of the last
remaining Armenian village in the country have other things on their
minds — oranges.
Of all the towns and villages once inhabited by Armenians across
eastern Turkey under the multi-ethnic Ottoman Empire, only the
picturesque village of Vakifli remains, nestled in the foothills of
the Musa Mountains overlooking the eastern corner of the
Mediterranean Sea and within sight of the Syrian border.
For the influential Armenian diaspora, Musa Mountain is a source of
pride as one of the few places where Christian Armenians resisted
deportations that killed many thousands.
The European Parliament this week became the latest international
body to call on Turkey to recognise the killings as genocide; a
political slap in the face for Ankara which is due to start European
Union membership talks yesterday.
”Of course it saddens us when the European Parliament makes such a
decision,” said Vakifli village headman Berc Kartun ”Isn’t it over
yet? … Ninety years have passed and as an Armenian, I think it
should be over and done with.” Smoking and playing cards in the
plain, white-walled tea-house surrounded by lush orange groves
stretching down to the shores of the Mediterranean, other villagers
said they were sick of foreigners harping on about genocide.
”Are there any citizens of Turkey who think that way, any Armenians
here who think that way?” asked 72-year-old Musa Emekliyan. ”What I
am worried about it is what will happen to my oranges, will they sell
this year.”
RAIN NOT RESOLUTIONS
Turkey sees an international campaign led by the Armenian diaspora to
blacken its name behind the claims of genocide.
Turkish nationalists also fear the EU’s calls for minority rights are
a repeat of Western meddling that ended in war and the break-up of
the Ottoman Empire.
With Russian forces advancing across the eastern frontier, in 1915
Istanbul’s Ottoman rulers ordered local Armenians to be sent to Syria
and Lebanon, fearing they might side with the Russians. Many were
killed or died from deprivation.

Boston Globe
Oct 2 2005
Criticism grows as legislatures press for courses on races
By Michael Gormley, Associated Press | October 2, 2005
ALBANY, N.Y. — State legislators are directing schools to teach
students more about the struggles and triumphs of different races and
ethnic groups, and some critics are objecting.
A mission in New York will examine whether the ”physical and
psychological terrorism” against Africans in the slave trade is being
adequately taught in schools.
The commission is named for the slave ship Amistad, which was
commandeered by slaves who eventually won their freedom in a US
Supreme Court ruling.
The recommendations could mean rewriting textbooks, which may
influence educators in other states, according to the National
Council for the Social Studies.
Other states have approved similar measures, the National Conference
of State Legislatures says.
In Illinois, an Amistad commission was also created this year, and
lessons on the Holocaust were added. In New Mexico, the Legislature
required that Indian education lessons be bolstered in kindergarten
through Grade 6.
In 2001, New Jersey created an Amistad commission, as well as a
Commission on Italian and Americans of Italian Heritage Culture and
Education to advise those involved in making policy.
In California, a Cesar Chavez Day was created in 2000; schools were
directed to include lessons about the farm labor activist. Also in
2000, schools in Rhode Island were directed to teach about genocide
and human rights violations, including the slave trade, the Irish
potato famine, the Armenian genocide of the early 1900s, the
Holocaust, and Benito Mussolini’s fascist regime in wartime Italy.
Virginia directed schools that year to teach about the
accomplishments of people from different backgrounds and races.
But while most legislatures approve curriculum changes recommended by
education departments, teachers, and researchers, New York’s Amistad
Commission is a case of the Legislature trying to circumvent the
state’s policy-setting Board of Regents, according to the law’s
cosponsor.
”We feel there is, indeed, a void in our education curriculum in New
York state when it comes to the issue of slavery and the
dehumanization of Africans,” said Assemblyman Clarence Norman Jr., a
Brooklyn Democrat.
Critics say that the goal of the commission is laudable but that
teachers have limited time to teach history. They also say educators
are needed on the panel to determine feasibility.