SNOWFLAKES AND DOUBLE AGENTS
Ranier Fsadni
Times of Malta, Malta
Sept 29 2005
Imagine setting out from Istanbul, Turkey’s city in Europe, travelling
for three days deep into Asia, only to end up on a European border. The
town is Kars, 40 years ago a thriving Turkish commercial centre
on the border with Armenia, now in decay. Once part of the Russian
empire, its dilapidated Baltic architecture is still the occasion
for novelistic rhapsody. Should Turkey enter the EU, Kars would,
of course, represent a European border.
Kars is at the centre of the most recent novel by Orhan Pamuk, the
internationally acclaimed Turkish writer, now being prosecuted in
Turkey for affirming that the Armenian genocide, still officially
denied by his country (although the government has authorised a
national conference on the subject), did take place. The novel is Snow
(Faber and Faber). In Mr Pamuk’s hands it ends up being an exploration
of Turkish identity that exploits all the ironies of the situation. In
view of the beginning of the EU’s negotiations with Turkey next Monday,
and some European objections to Turkey’s membership on the grounds
of identity, it is worth having a quick look at this complex novel.
What sets the events in motion is a blizzard that cuts off the town.
But what I am calling simply the events is a storm of plots and
subplots. The year is probably 1992. A poet, called Ka, who comes to
town in search of a woman he loves. An epidemic of suicides by young
girls who want to wear their Islamic headscarf – but whose suicides are
defying both the state and the Islamist leaders. A theatre director who
stages a coup. A novelist, called Orhan, who is trying to reconstruct
Ka’s three-day visit four years after Ka left.
Islamists and secularists argue about whether being Muslim is backward
or the only possible dignified affirmation of identity. Some of the
arguments centre on whether poverty can explain religious adherence
at the end of the 20th century. But the real poverty that the novel
diagnoses is that of communication. Kars has lost its former wealth
because the borders are closed. Worse things have happened to human
communication.
This is a novel in which any act of persuasion is – and is perceived
to be – motivated by a hidden agenda. Ka notices that everyone speaks
in a double code – even when the woman he loves and her sister speak
to their father. One code is to be understood by everyone; the other,
secret one is aimed only at an inner secret circle.
To complicate matters, no hidden agenda is considered to be purely
personal. Ka is told by the Islamist agitator, Blue, that anyone
who tries to change anyone else’s mind is an agent – an agent of the
Turkish state, the Islamists, atheist Europe, the nationalist Kurds
(a shadowy presence in the book). It turns out that even in death,
people are agents – no character involved in the central narrative dies
a natural death: they are murdered or executed (for being agents),
killed at random (transformed into victims of one side or another
in an attempted coup) or else commit suicide as a defiant gesture
against the state. At one point, Blue believes that the best way
in which he can outwit the coupists is by letting them kill him –
his death would make of him a hero and martyr, much more difficult
to control than if he took up a secret offer of safe escape.
Just as the town is swirling with snowflakes, the novel swirls with
lies, double agents, spies and informers. Lies and mimicry are the
tissue of such a social life, penetrating not just conversations but
also actions, gestures and personality. More than once, we are told
that a character strikes a pose straight out of a comic book. The
monuments to Ataturk are said to have been inspired by the poses
invented by a melodramatic actor, Sunay Zaim (the leader of the coup
in Kars, who has something of Gabriele D’Annunzio about him).
While most characters argue about identity, what becomes comically
clear is that their ideas about identity are false. The Islamists
have a mistaken idea of what Europe is – in one discussion it emerges
that only one person, apart from Ka, has visited it. Tellingly, for
all those Europeans who object to Turkey’s membership on the grounds
of Europe’s Christian roots, the Islamists object to Europe because
they consider it atheist; the only time Christianity is alluded to
is when the narrator says that like Ka he liked the “Protestant”
punctuality and service of German trains.
Meanwhile, the Turkish “secularists” emerge not as people who have
become Europeanised (as the Islamists accuse them, a charge which they
do not deny) but as Stalinists or totalitarians. Kars is portrayed
as a decayed border town infested with police informers and under the
eye of the central state’s intelligence service, with the army at bay.
The impact of this poverty of communication is twofold. First,
although many of the characters, caught between the state machinery
and the rebel cells, strike a blow for their individuality (this is
how the serial suicides by the headscarf girls are explained), most
characters appear to us as almost interchangeable doubles: the woman
Ka loves and her Islamist sister; Ka and the novelist Orhan; Sunay
Zaim and Blue; the two Islamist-poet youths, Necip and Fazil… When
Ka and Necip die, Orhan and Fazil, because of their respective losses,
become doubles of each other. The novel leaves it up to us to decide
whether the special affinity between each pair is a sign of mystical
communion or whether each pair is really one schizophrenic person.
Second, this personal schizophrenia leads to Mr Pamuk’s (the
author, not the character in the novel) portrayal of the country’s
schizophrenia. The novel does not lend itself to the usual portrayal
of a Turkey divided between Europeanised secularists and Islam. The
Islamists in this novel turn out to have much in common with the
state apparatchiks: both groups speak and think like the secret police.
The real schizophrenia, as portrayed here, is that between the
mentality of a militarised, repressive, police state and an open
mentality that seeks love rather than security and which is here
represented not just by the secular protagonist but also by a shadowy
mystical Islamic (Sufi) master.
It is a schizophrenia that affects even how the novel is written.
Much of it is in the forensic style of a police report (and reports
about reports) or autopsy. But the most lyrical passages (at least
in the English translation) are those which concern the swirling snow
that covers the town. Ka comes to compare the human lifetime to that
of a snowflake; the 19 poems that his three days in Kars inspire
drift into him like snowflakes and he organises them according to
the structure of a snowflake in preparation for publication (although
the manuscript is lost).
For Mr Pamuk to use this novel to deliver a message about Turkey’s EU
membership would have made him collude in the acts of propaganda that
the novel diagnoses with such melancholy. But what he has produced
is not just an interpretation of Turkey’s identity. It is also a
novel that has much to say about the formation of identity, anywhere,
in today’s world.

POLITIS, CYPRUS: EU GIVES SEVERA SLAP IN TURKEY’S FACE
Focus News, Bulgaria
Sept 29 2005
Strasbourg. The EU Parliament discovered two problems of Turkey after
yesterday’s session of the EU Parliament. This comes only five days
before the start of the accession talks between Turkey and Cyprus on
3rd October, Politis newspaper reports.
The EU Parliament reminded for the Turkish duties concerning Cyprus
in connection with the recognition of the country and Turkey’s
acknowledgement of the genocide against Armenian people. “If Ankara
doesn’t recognize Nicosia as soon as possible, that will have serious
consequences on the pre-accession procedures between Turkey and the
EU that could lead even to their ceasing”, the newspaper ads.

AUSTRIA CLAIMS ‘DOUBLE STANDARDS’ ON TURKISH TALKS
By Haig Simonian in Vienna, Daniel Dombey in Brussels and Raphael, Minder in Strasbourg
Financial Times, UK
Sept 29 2005
Wolfgang Schussel, Austria’s chancellor, yesterday sent an
uncompromising message on Turkey’s bid to join the European Union,
increasing the likelihood that talks will only begin if the EU also
moves towards starting negotiations with Croatia.
Some western diplomats warn that such a deal, in which Turkey would
begin its membership talks on time next Monday and Croatia would
follow soon after, could hurt efforts to track down war criminals in
the former Yugoslavia.
In an interview with the FT, Mr Schussel called for the EU to abandon
the idea that the talks with Turkey should be exclusively aimed
at membership.
He also denounced the EU’s “double standards” over Croatia, whose
membership bid is stalled because of a dispute over Ante Gotovina, an
alleged war criminal. “We need an alternative that would ensure that
Turkey would remain bonded as strongly as possible to the EU,” he said.
“If we trust Turkey to make further progress we should trust Croatia
too . .. It is in Europe’s interest to start negotiations with Croatia
immediately.”
Austria denies it is linking the cases of Turkey and Croatia in
any way.
However, EU diplomats now believe a deal on Turkey will only be
possible if the EU moves closer to starting talks with Croatia.
Most EU governments say Vienna’s demands on Turkey – particularly its
call to delete a reference to EU accession as the goal of the talks –
are unacceptable. But Austria, like all EU states, needs to give its
assent if talks are to begin.
The dispute is expected to go to an emergency meeting of foreign
ministers on Sunday night, hours before the scheduled start of talks.
Diplomats say such a high-profile meeting could make it impossible
for Austria to give up its position on Turkey without gaining ground
on Croatia, with which it has cultivated close relations.
“It is not fair to leave Croatia in an eternal waiting room,” said
Mr Schussel. “I don’t understand the logic.”
Carla del Ponte, chief prosecutor at the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, has recently indicated that
Croatia has stepped up its efforts against Mr Gotovina.
But some western officials argue that beginning talks with Croatia
while Mr Gotovina is at large will set a bad precedent for efforts
to track down Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, the Bosnian Serb
indicted war criminals.
* Concerns about Ankara’s bid to join the EU were underlined yesterday
by a non-binding resolution on Turkey approved by the European
parliament. In a move likely to increase resentment in Ankara,
MEPs urged Turkey to recognise that the killing of Armenians in 1915
amounted to genocide. MEPs also delayed approval of a customs union
agreement between Turkey and the EU, in an attempt to increase pressure
on Turkey to normalise political and economic ties with Cyprus.

BAYKAL SLAMS EP DECISION
NTV MSNBC, Turkey
Sept 29 2005
The leader of Turkey’s main opposition party has slammed the decision
by the European Parliament calling on Turkey to recognise the so-called
Armenian genocide.
Guncelleme: 11:34 29 Eylul 2005 PerºembeLONDON – The CHP leader said
that the European Union was creating difficulties and dragging its
feet over Turkey’s membership bid.
Attending the annual Labour Party Congress in England, Republican
People’s Party (CHP) chairman Deniz Baykal said that the decision of
the European Parliament only served to further complicate matters.
Earlier on Wednesday, the European parliament voted in favour of a
non-binding resolution making recognition of the alleged massacre
of many of the Ottoman Empire’s Armenian citizens during the First
World War a pre-condition of Turkey’s entry into the European Union.
“Despite them asking us to meet many conditions, it appears there is
no condition to guarantee Turkey membership,” he said.
–Boundary_(ID_GVWtvHMpCCF1JCarst3mmw)–

FINNISH PRESIDENT IN TBILISI
By Christina Tashkevich
The Messenger, Georgia
Sept 29 2005
Rustaveli Avenue on Wednesday adorned with Finnish and Georgian flags;
the road was closed as President Tarja Halonen arrived at the Tbilisi
Marriott Georgia’s ambitions to join the European Union and the role
of the EU in the settlement of conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia
were on the top of the agenda during the first visit of Finland’s
head of state to Tbilisi.
The President of Finland Tarja Halonen arrived in Tbilisi on Wednesday
for a two-day visit that included a meeting with Georgian President
Mikheil Saakashvili.
Saakashvili once again noted that Georgia is trying diligently to
settle the conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia peacefully.
At a briefing in Parliament with the Finnish president on Wednesday,
he said that Georgia does not want upheaval at a time when it “needs
economic development.”
Saakashvili said his government is ready to work together with Russia,
the United States and the countries of the European Union in settling
the conflicts.
“I hope that during consultations together with the Russian Federation
we are able to create such mechanisms to avoid further problems,”
Saakashvili said.
President Halonen said at the briefing that Finland is well informed
about the current state of the conflicts in Georgia and that Georgia
can rely on her country’s support in this issue.
She called on sides to look for mechanisms that can resolve the
conflicts in a peaceful way. “Peaceful settlement is the most
sustainable solution,” she said.
Georgian Minister of Foreign Affairs Salome Zourabichvili noted on
Wednesday that Finland will receive the EU presidency in the second
half of 2006. “This will be the time when we will enter into the
fulfillment phase of the action plan and when the issue of further
EU expansion will be raised,” she said.
The Georgian media reports that also on the agenda during Halonen’s
visit were prospects for Finnish businesses investing in Georgia.
Aleksandre Rondeli, the president of the Georgian Foundation for
Strategic and International Studies, praised Finland as an “exemplary
country” and its president as “a famous politician who knows what’s
going on in the region.”
President Halonen is on a tour of the Caucasus countries spanning
the dates September 26-30. She arrived in Tbilisi on Wednesday from
Armenia and after Georgia will move on to Azerbaijan, together with
her husband, doctor Pentti Arajarvi.
The Helsinki daily Helsingin Sanomat reported this week that this is
not Halonen’s first visit to the Caucasus. She visited Georgia in 1980
and Armenia and Azerbaijan in 1996 as Finland’s Minister for Foreign
Affairs, when she contributed to negotiations on the Nagorno Karabagh
conflict. However, it is the first visit of a Finnish president to
Georgia after the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991.
“The EU is heavily involved in the development of the three
countries. Georgia is especially keen to develop its ties with the
West, and all three are seen as likely to join the E.U. at some time
in the future,” the newspaper wrote on September 26.
Halonen’s visit comes less than two months after a delegation of the
Finnish Border Department headed by department chief Jaakko Smolander
arrived in Georgia. During the delegation’s three-day stay in early
August, a joint declaration on cooperation was signed between the
two country’s boarder guards and the Finnish representatives toured
Georgia’s northern frontier with Russia.
During her visit to Georgia President Halonen also met with the
Georgian Prime Minister Zurab Noghaideli and Speaker of Parliament
Nino Burjanadze.

ANALYSIS-EU DREAM HAS ALREADY TURNED SOUR FOR SOME TURKS
By Jon Hemming
Reuters, UK
Sept 29 2005
ISTANBUL, Sept 29 (Reuters) – It may take 10 years before Turkey joins
the European Union, but even at this nascent stage of negotiations
EU demands have inflamed Turkish nationalism.
The constant stream of criticism from the European Union has revived
memories of Western meddling in the 19th and early 20th centuries that
put an end to Turkey’s empire and, but for a nationalist uprising,
would have dismembered Turkey itself.
“The whole issue of nationalism represents the most difficult and
the deepest gap between Turkey and the EU,” said one Turkey-based
EU diplomat.
While the EU was formed to overcome the discredited nationalism that
came close to destroying the continent in World War Two, Turkish
identity was forged by Kemal Ataturk’s 1920s nationalist struggle
that fought off French, British and Greek invaders and suppressed
Kurdish and Islamist threats.
Thus European calls for more rights for the Kurds, pressure over
Cyprus and for Turkey to recognise the Armenian genocide 90 years ago,
unite the far right, far left and many in the secular establishment
against what they see as underhand EU plots.
“Turkey is experiencing the same betrayal by intellectuals that
broke up the Ottoman Empire,” said nationalist party leader Muhsin
Yazicioglu this month.
LEFT AND RIGHT UNITE
While most Turks still favour joining the EU, support has fallen from
73 percent a year ago to 63 percent in a recent survey. However,
as Turkey and the EU get down to the nitty-gritty of negotiations,
support could fall even further, analysts say.
“There is only one fault line in Turkey and that is between those for
and against the EU,” said Istanbul University professor Mehmet Altan.
Meanwhile, opposition in Europe to Turkey’s membership — as high as
80 percent in Austria and 74 percent in Germany — feeds the sense
of suspicion and discrimination felt by many Turks.
This has made for some strange bedfellows.
Scruffy leftists with bushy Lenin beards found themselves rubbing
shoulders with smart dark-suited right-wing nationalists last weekend
at a demonstration against an Istanbul conference by liberal academics
discussing claims of Armenian genocide.
“No EU, no USA, but a completely independent Turkey,” the leftists
chanted, pointing angrily at the EU flag flying above the exclusive
private university hosting the conference.
“Turkey is Turkish and will stay Turkish,” the rightists clamoured,
in similar vein.
The EU closely watched the conference controversy.
“We see this is a question of whether the Turkish mentality can change
and whether openness can prevail over those who prefer a nationalist
view of their history,” the diplomat said.
Both the right-wing Nationalist Action Party and the Turkish Communist
Party are planning anti-EU protests on Oct. 2, the day before Brussels
is due to start long and difficult talks that could lead to Turkey’s
eventual entry to the bloc.
However, more worrying for Turkey’s EU supporters and Turkish liberals
dreaming of shedding their oriental past is the depth of nationalism
in the establishment and the army.
STATE CHALLENGED
For most Turks, Kemal Ataturk is still a hero who saved Turkey from
foreign forces during and after World War One, restored national
pride and turned the country towards Europe.
However for some, his state-centred, top-down legacy sits uneasily
with the pluralist, democratic EU Turkey seeks to join.
“The way to democratise this country, to realise individual rights
and freedoms, to transform a Kemalist state into a democratic state
which values people is the EU,” said Altan.
The so-called “deep state” and the powerful military are uneasy about
surrendering any sovereignty to Brussels, he said.
Europe is “trying to change our national culture by imposing foreign
values, fashion and languages that do not match Turkish customs and
traditions”, complained Turkish Chief of General Staff Hilmi Ozkok
this year.
Increased Kurdish rebel attacks and a violent nationalist backlash
have raised tension in Turkey ahead of Oct. 3 and undermined Prime
Minister Tayyip Erdogan’s government which has cast aside its Islamist
roots to champion Turkey’s EU cause.
However, many in Erdogan’s own party, including ministers, come from a
nationalist background. They, and many across the political spectrum,
could baulk at too many concessions to EU demands on Cyprus, the
Kurds and minority rights.
“When they get bored by this EU process and because they cannot
offer any logical counter-argument, they’ll get angry and work up
nationalist reaction,” Altan said. “It is a reaction by those fattened
in the past and represents their helplessness.”

U.S. RADAR STATION IN AZERBAIJAN WILL NOT AFFECT NEGATIVELY AZERI-IRANIAN RELATIONS
Today, Azerbaijan
29 September 2005 [09:18] – Today.Az
Azerbaijani political scientists agree in views that the construction
of the U.S radar station in the territory of the country must not
affect negatively the Azerbaijani-Iranian relations.
Commenting negative reaction of some Iranian mass media on the issue,
Vafa Guluzada, the former adviser to the Azerbaijani President,
noted that the position of Iran is natural.
“Iran must understand that Azerbaijan peruses its own goals, but the
United States carries out its own plans in the region,” he underlined.
“Iran must regard extending of the cooperation between Azerbaijan
and the United States as normal,” Uzeyir Jafarov, the military expert
noted in his turn. Issue of license on construction of radar station
is internal affair of Azerbaijan.
“If Iran strengthen it relations with Armenia, but Azerbaijan does not
regard it as serious danger for its national interests, then Iran must
accept the fact of development of the Azerbaijani-U.S. relations,”
he added.
In his turn, MP Anar Mammadkhanov stressed that the Iranian-Azerbaijani
relations would be subjected to any serious changes. “Iran must
understand that Azerbaijan takes the steps not for pleasure, but to
ensure national interests,” he said.
(Trend)
URL:

NATO PA COMMITTEE APPROVES REPORT ON GARABAGH CONFLICT
AzerNews, Azerbaijan
Sept 29 2005
NATO Parliamentary Assembly committee on the civil dimension of
security has approved a report on the Armenia-Azerbaijan Upper
Garabagh conflict.
All the recommendations made by Azerbaijan were included in the first
draft of the document, prepared by German parliamentarian Von Heden.
The report also indicates that Azerbaijan’s territories have been
occupied by Armenia, parliament vice-speaker and head of the Azeri
delegation at NATO PA Ziyafat Asgarov said.
Asgarov told journalists that the Azerbaijani party was earlier
discontent with the first draft, which erroneously said that not 20%,
but 16% of Azeri land is under occupation and that more Armenians
than Azerbaijanis used to live in the conflict zone. “The Azerbaijani
delegation aims to achieve approval of the report by NATO PA as well.
I have discussed this with the Assembly leadership. We stressed that
NATO PA should act the same way the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe (PACE) did,” the vice-speaker said. PACE passed
a resolution late in January confirming that Armenia occupies Azeri
territories.

NATIONAL INTEREST ISSUES UNDER DISCUSSION IN THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FOREIGN POLICY
Macedonian Press Agency, Greece
Athens, 29 September 2005 (13:16 UTC+2)
Issues of national interest and the latest developments in Turkey’s EU
accession course will be discussed in detail in the National Council
on Foreign Policy that meets today under the presidency of Foreign
Minister Petros Molyviatis.
Yesterday, the European Parliament plenary session sent a strong
message to Turkey just a few days before the opening of Turkey’s EU
accession negotiations.
In a resolution adopted by the European Parliament it is mentioned
that a precondition for Turkey to become a member of the EU will be
to recognize the Armenian Genocide committed in 1915, while Turkey
is also called to recognize the Republic of Cyprus as soon as possible.
It is underlined that in case this does not happen, the consequences
on the negotiation process will be serious and could lead even to
its interruption.
It is stressed that the opening of negotiations will be the starting
point of a long process which by nature is open-ended and does not
lead in advance and automatically to accession.
A special reference is made to the serious and persistent violation
(in Turkey) of the principles of democracy, freedom, human rights,
fundamental freedoms, minority rights and the state of law.
Specifically, a reference is made to the problems in the freedom of
expression faced by author Orhan Pamuk. Regarding a very sensitive
issue for Greece, concern is being expressed for the operation of
religious minorities. The law on properties that belong to religious
institutions (=Vakoufia) is mentioned as a characteristic example.
Meanwhile, the European Parliament Foreign Affairs Committee
postponed the vote for the expansion of Turkey’s customs union with
the European Union.
The postponement decision was reached by the European
Parliament plenary session after a proposal by the leader of the
Christian-Democrats according to which, Turkey is not committed that
it will not proceed with the signing of the statement on the non
recognition of Cyprus during the ratification of the Ankara Protocol
by the Turkish National Assembly.

AMID DISQUIET, TURKISH SUPPORT FOR EU MEMBERSHIP WANES
Middle East Times, Egypt
Sept 29 2005
ANKARA — Turks are losing their enthusiasm for EU membership amid
increasing doubts on whether their mainly Muslim country will ever
be welcome in the bloc and mounting pressure on Ankara to tackle its
most nationally explosive issues, analysts say.
Ankara’s four-decade drive to join the European Union has always
enjoyed strong public support, but the latest polls suggest a
significant drop as the country gears up for long-craved accession
talks on October 3.
A survey released in early September by the US-based German Marshall
Fund of some 1,000 Turks showed that only 63 percent believe that EU
membership would be a good thing, compared to 73 percent last year.
“I have no faith in the EU, they will never allow us in,” said Cengiz
Aybar, a 34-year-old lawyer. “Even if membership talks begin they
will go on forever with no result.”
Hulya Aslan, a 41-year-old retired banker, was just as pessimistic,
arguing that Turkey would never be welcome because of its Muslim faith.
“They are only playing with us,” she said. “They will try to extract
as many concessions as possible before selling us off.”
The main reason for the sour mood is a mounting debate in Europe on
whether Turkey should actually become a member of the bloc. This is
giving Turks the feeling that they are being badly treated, Cengiz
Aktar, director of the EU center at Istanbul’s Bahcesehir University,
said.
Rejection of the EU constitution in referenda in France and the
Netherlands earlier this year, influenced in part by opposition to
Turkey’s membership, has taken its toll on the euphoria in Turkey that
followed the EU’s commitment at a December 17 summit in Brussels to
begin accession talks.
In Germany conservative leader Angela Merkel, whose Christian Union
bloc narrowly won the September 18 general elections and is aiming to
lead a ruling coalition, has long wanted to offer Turkey a “privileged
partnership” rather than full membership.
In France another political heavyweight, Nicolas Sarkozy, president
of the ruling UMP party and a possible successor to President Jacques
Chirac, argues against opening membership talks with Turkey for the
immediate future.
“These are not the expressions of new partnership but of new animosity
– Turkey is presented like a bitter enemy of Europe,” Aktar said.
“This has created a bitter and negative environment of which even
the most pro-EU circles in Turkey have had enough,” he added.
Adding to what appears to Turkey like a U-turn on the EU’s commitment
is increasing pressure on Ankara to take steps that many would
consider betraying the country’s basic policies, said Cigdem Nas,
of Marmara University’s European Community Institute.
Tensions have flared over the divided island of Cyprus since July,
when Turkey extended a customs union agreement to the bloc’s 10 newest
members, including Cyprus, but insisted that the move did not amount
to recognition of the island’s internationally acknowledged Greek
Cypriot administration.
The EU hit back by insisting on proper recognition.
Another hot topic is the massacres of Armenians under the Ottoman
Empire during World War I, the forerunner of modern-day Turkey.
Armenians claim that up to 1.5 million of their people were slaughtered
in an Ottoman “genocide”, a claim that Turkey strongly rejects.
“Turkey is being gradually pushed into an internal settling of accounts
and this creates a backlash in a country where nationalism runs high
and the EU has come to symbolize all the foreign pressure on Ankara,”
Nas said.
The past few months have seen the rise of several new civic
organizations that take their names from armed resistance groups
that fought against allied occupation during Turkey’s 1919-21 War of
Independence, and which say that their aim is to save the country from
“treasonous collaborators”.
“Even though there is an ideological anti-EU movement in Turkey,
many know that the EU will be to the country’s benefit. So support
of EU membership will once again increase,” Nas predicted.
“But cornering Turkey on national issues such as Cyprus and the
Armenian massacres would lead to a further backlash,” she warned.