Turkey's EU membership

[Guest]

Verheugen: Turkey may become EU member without solution to Cyprus

issue

 

From the Republic of Cyprus Press and Information Office (PIO) Server at http://www.pio.gov.cy/

 

According to Turkish Daily News (3.2.01), Gunther Verheugen, EU Commissioner responsible for enlargement, said Turkey may became an EU member without having to a come up with a solution to the Cyprus dispute.

 

Speaking at Manset - a TV program on CNN Turk prepared by Mehmet Ali Birand - Verheugen evaluated Turkey -EU relations and said that the Cyprus issue was not exactly a precondition for Turkey/s EU membership.

 

Asked if there was a negative atmosphere surrounding Turkey/s EU membership, Verheugen responded that Turkey has the same statute as the other twelve candidate countries which have started membership

negotiations with the European Union.

 

``I think the problem stemmed from the fact that Turkey did not start membership negotiations with the EU as well as the other candidates. The statute was given to Turkey in Helsinki and reaffirmed at the

Nice Summit. So there is no change in Turkey/s statute. I wrote a letter to the other EU Commission members and asked them to take Turkey into consideration as a candidate country'', Verheugen said.

 

Drawing attention to the fact that the speed of the accession process will depend on Turkey itself, Verheugen noted that Turkey had not lagged behind in the membership process so far.

 

``There is no delay in Turkey/s membership process. We will make our decision within a few weeks and then Turkey will submit its national program.

 

But I have to remind you that Turkey should take serious steps in fulfilling necessary reforms. To write something on paper is nothing. We want Turkey to take the action it writes on the paper. Of course

fulfilment of these responsibilities can take a long time. I am repeating again that to start the membership process totally depends on Turkey. Turkey may face some difficulties during that time - which

every country may face - but this is not an issue for us. We take our notes and we wait. Whenever Turkey overcomes its difficulties, that will be the appropriate time for us. Turkey may become an EU member without having to come up with a solution to the Cyprus dispute'' he said.

 

Verheugen also said Greece had played a very positive role in Turkey/s relations with the EU since the Helsinki Summit.

 

Asked if the Armenian genocide issue would create any problems between the EU and Turkey, Verheugen replied that the issue should be left to historians, but called on Turkey to behave rationally when showing reactions to the policies of EU countries.

 

Verheugen also pointed out that it is very difficult to defend Turkey in Europe since there is intense criticism of the violation of human rights in Turkey. He concluded that the EU is not a Christian club, and said different cultures will add richness to the EU.

[Guest]

RUSSIAN NEWSPAPER: TURKEY MUST LEARN TO BEHAVE LIKE A CIVILIZED COUNTRY

 

"AZG" Armenian Daily # 19, 02/02/2001

Armenian issue

 

The Russian Trud newspaper writes that the painful, sometimes crazy

reaction of Turkey concerning the French Senate decision on

Armenian Genocide shows that till now Turkey didn't grow to the

level it can become a member of European Union. And better nobody

be tricked by the Europeans' agreement to consider turkey a

"candidate country" for EU.

 

According to the newspaper, until the Turks do not radically change

their political morals, their "candidacy" will last for years. In

nowadays Europe it is accepted to recognize the mistakes of the

past and to apologize for committed crimes. Whereas, the newspaper

writes, Turks are not ready to correct their deeds. According to

the paper, the reason for this is that in Turkish policy the

nationalism still plays a big role.

[Guest]

EU Commission Calls On Turkey To Cool Reaction To French Law On Genocide

BRUSSELS (Agence France Presse)--The European Commission called on Turkey on Friday, February 9 for moderation in its virulent reaction to France's official recognition of the killing of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire as genocide.

 

Commission spokesman Jean-Christophe Filori told a press briefing that it would make a legal inquiry into the economic retaliatory measures taken by Turkey after French President Jacques Chirac signed the genocide recognition into law this week.

 

In addition, the city of Paris said it would erect a bronze memorial to the victims of the 1915 massacres and the Armenians who were killed during both World Wars.

 

Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit said the promulgation of the French law did not come as a surprise, but he described it as a serious disappointment in our relations with France.

 

"We are doing what is necessary. We are reconsidering our political and economic relations," Ecevit told reporters in Ankara earlier in the week.

 

Turkey responded quickly by canceling a contract with France's Dassault firm for the installation of electronic systems on 80 warplanes. The decision to oust the French company from the project, estimated at some $200 million, was taken at a meeting between officials from Turkey's general staff and the defense ministry.

 

Dassault is the second French company to be excluded from a defense contract since January 18, when French deputies passed the bill signed by Chirac.

 

Last week, Turkey annulled a preliminary contract with Alcatel for a spy satellite, worth $200 million and warned of more economic sanctions.

 

On Thursday, Turkey canceled a major highway tender in which both bidding consortia included French companies.

 

Filori reiterated remarks by EU Enlargement Commissioner Guenter Verheugen calling on Ankara not to "over-react" to the French moves and calling it "friendly advice."

 

Turkey is last in line among 13 candidate countries for EU membership. Its candidate status was made contingent in last December's Helsinki summit on Ankara accepting EU precepts on human rights, democracy and the rule of law, all conditions it has not yet satisfied.

 

Verheugen said it was not for the commission to issue opinions on the vote by the French parliament, which concerned "events that happened a very long time ago, even well before European construction."

 

Verheugen would "leave that debate to the historians," said the spokesman.

[MJ]

Turkey and Europe

 

Norman Stone, Turkish Daily News, Nov 16, 2001 - Back in 1995, Turkey and Europe were joined in a Customs Union. There had been a certain opposition from the Greek lobby, which was quite influential in the British Labour Party -- quite regularly books appeared blaming the United States for the current division of Cyprus, and this anti-Americanism used to be fairly strong in the Labour left. When Turkey's customs privileges were being discussed, the American ambassador in London, Adm. Crowe telephoned Labour leader Tony Blair and got him to drop his opposition.

 

This was a characteristic episode. The Europeans, left to their own devices would probably have made greater difficulties about the customs unions. Yes, Turkey is an important market, and her trade with Europe has grown considerably since the days not so long ago when the principal export was nuts. European exports to Turkey amount to over $30 trillion and the main Turkish roads are often clogged with huge lorries, heading back and forth from Germany especially. German industry, especially, has been resettling in Kocaeli and Izmir to take advantage of Turkey's lower wage-cost. However, economic co-operation is one thing; politics is different. Again and again, we find the Americans (and to an extent the British) taking a lead to make Turkey's relations with Europe less uneasy than they usually are. The Americans have, especially since Sept. 11, an immediate understanding of Turkey's role in the world. If she becomes destabilized or is somehow marginalized then the Middle East could all too easily blow up. When the American Diaspora tried two years ago to get Congress to condemn Turkey for the ancient business of the Armenian alleged massacres, the Israelis and the American military were very quick to put an end to the affair: Why disturb relations with an important country over a century-old affair, the historical background to which was in any case dubious? The Europeans do not take quite the same line.

 

To some extent this has to do with the way in which the European Union operates. It can be manipulated quite easily by small determined lobbies, using what appears to be impeccably objective language to advance their interests. Thus, for instance, a "directive" from Brussels decrees what levels of noise are permissible for lawn-mowers in the union. Very good you might think, until you reflect that Brussels has absolutely no business telling householders in Naples what noise they are allowed to make. Behind this "directive" was a perfectly straightforward piece of commercial manipulation: British lawn-mowers, rather more expensive than German ones, are also less noisy, and the "directive" was an excellent way of excluding the German competitors or making life difficult for them.

 

A small matter, but the same kind of manipulation happens in matters of greater concern. Cyprus is an obvious case. To the neutral observer it is simply absurd that North Cyprus has not been recognized as an independent state. There are many smaller ones in the world and the place has survived nearly a generation of nonrecognition, and even for its exports of trade sanctions. Left to itself, North Cyprus would probably flourish, not least because its coasts have not been ruined by the boom of mass-tourism which has done such harm in the south. Since 1974 it has existed as a Turkish Republic, and there is now no chance at all that its people could form a united state with the Greek Cypriots to the south: contact was broken off a generation ago, and in a sensible world we should simply have amicable cross-border co-operation as to travel, electricity etc. as happens between the Dutch and French parts of, say, Saint-Eustache in the Caribbean.

 

The Turkish position is quite well-founded in international law. The London treaties of 1959-60 allowed Turkey a say, if necessary military, in the affairs of the island, and they also stated that Cyprus should not join any other state or groups of states without the consent of all interested parties. And now, what do we find? The Europeans considering the application of Cyprus to join the European Union. The application has been made by the south with support from Greece. If the application goes ahead then we have the likelihood of endless clashes between the Europeans and Turkey, whose soldiers protect the north. Already there are foretastes. A Strasbourg court stated that Turkey should compensate a Greek Cypriot woman for the loss of her property a generation ago. How absurd this is in a European context! In 1945, millions of Germans were expelled from Czechoslovakia and Poland.

 

This was a very harsh business, as the Germans were told, in the same implacable language as had been used for Nazi deportations of Czechs and Poles, that they could take only a suitcase. They were dumped in makeshift camps in Germany and many died. It was a very sad business. However, the background must be understood: Hitler's attempt to create a Greater Germany, using these local Germans to undermine neighboring peoples -- the Poles especially having suffered enormously. Much to their credit, the West Germans came to terms with this and 25 years after the end of the war they formally accepted what had happened. The result has been entirely for the good. Czech-German and Polish-German relations are very good, and Germans, with economic, environmental experience, play a positive part. Why cannot the Greeks have a similar understanding of Cyprus, and why do they not just recognize the accomplished fact of the existence of Northern Cyprus? It would do only good for the Greeks' own position vis-a-vis Turkey -- trade, investment, and protection -- but unfortunately the European Union does not encourage realism of this kind. Greek nationalists can force their government to pursue a fantasy and do damage to Europe's relations with Turkey -- even now, apparently when a private yacht puts into a Greek harbor it is welcomed by officials who have been taught to say, "welcome to Europe," as if the Turkish ports (generally better places in every way than the townships of the barren Aegean islands) were somehow just "Asia."

 

But it is not just Greek nationalism that makes Turco-European relations rather difficult. For Turkey to become a member of the union, she would really have to be a different country. For instance, since 1960 an exceptionally complicated set of rules has governed European agriculture, called the Common Agricultural Policy. It cost about $100 billion. Originally, it was meant to protect the lives of millions of peasants. Nowadays, the rural proportion of the western European population has sunk below 5 percent. In Turkey, the proportion is around 40 percent. In other words, a Common Agricultural policy, applied to Turkey, would become fabulously expensive.

 

There is of course more to it. Since 1991, there has been free movement of labor within Western Europe. Usually what this means is that educated people move. Great numbers of French people have shifted to London, attracted by its freedom from the tight regulations that govern life at home, and great numbers of British people have shifted to France, where life, in terms of traffic, restaurants and house prices, is much easier. If Turkey now joined she would no doubt be sending millions of workers. This would not be a particular problem for the Italians, French or British, in whose countries Turks are much-respected, but there would be an inevitable problem in Germany. Already, there are 3 million Turks in Germany, and though many have assimilated, a great number have not and have no intention of doing so. It is certainly astounding to see in Cologne young Turks of the fourth generation, talking to each other in the Language of rural Anatolia of two generations ago.

 

It is also true that you will hear mutterings -- very seldom in public -- that Turkey, a Muslim country, cannot belong in a European Union of states with Christian values. On this, European propaganda can sound quite false, even absurd. A claim goes that Europeans regard minority rights as sacrosanct. But, within living memory, ethnic cleansing was the European rule, and in France it was actually stated in the Constitution that non-French local languages, for instance Breton or Provencal, were not to be used in public. In Brittany, for instance, when school children went out into the playground, they took with them a shoe which was handed to any child who spoke Breton. The last child to have to carry the shoe was beaten by the headmaster when playtime ended. In Wales, under Gladstone's Liberal government of a century ago, children were also beaten if they used Welsh, simply because in those days teachers took the view that education required proper knowledge of English. In Sweden in the 1930s they even sterilized the Lapps.

 

Now Europeans talk a different language and try to encourage and even subsidize these dialects; a considerable bureaucracy has grown out of this, and its demands just grow and grow (as can be seen in the present French problem over Corsica, where linguistic separatism, in all ways grotesque, has emerged complete with outbreaks of urban terror). British politician Norman Tebbit immortally observed such things: it is like Jurassic Park -- you take a fossil, spend hundreds of millions on it and create a monster. Europeans, preaching minority rights, might do a great deal of damage in countries, the cohesive of which is still quite fragile.

 

More generally, there is no doubt something of a problem with the image of Turkey in the West. Midnight Express, that brilliant but unfortunate film (its director later said that he wished he had not gone so far), is regularly shown on western television; there are, again and again, clips about the archaeological site at Hasankeyf in which Turks are accused of damaging an old Roman city of great interest because they wish to go ahead with dams that will in effect monopolize water-supplies for Turkey at her neighbors' expense. To the foreigners who actually live and work in Turkey -- there are hundreds of thousands of us -- this negative image is incomprehensible. Perhaps the Turkish government should apply itself to improving the image, but an image-problem, unquestionably, there is. One consequence is that foreign investment here is astonishingly low. Hungary, the economy of which could almost fit into the Eminonu quarter of Istanbul, gets twelve times as much as Turkey. Having lived here for nearly seven years, and seen the economy at work -- and how Turks work -- I just do not understand this, and think that an image problem is responsible.

 

Educated Turks quite often see Europe as the savior, the creator of the economic miracle. Yes, in the 50s for Germany, and in the 60s for France, Europe was indeed associated with economic miracles. But now Europe grows very slowly; hers is a very rich market, but much of it stems from pension money rather than economic creation, and there is an enormous problem of unemployment. The present moment for Turkey is indeed very difficult indeed. But there is hope.

 

http://www.ataa.org/spotlight/op_stone_nov19.html

 

[ November 24, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[MJ]

EU Commission Says 10 Countries Can Join EU

Wed Oct 9,10:33 AM ET

By Gareth Jones

 

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Commission said on Wednesday 10 countries

can wrap up accession talks in December and join the EU in 2004 in a

historic unification of Europe, provided Ireland's voters do not derail the

project.

Thirteen years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the EU executive said

former communist east European states such as Poland and Hungary were ready

to compete inside the EU's single market following long and painful economic

and social reforms.

Presenting its annual enlargement report, the Commission said it would

support Bulgaria's and Romania's efforts to join as early as 2007, expanding

the bloc into the troubled Balkan region, if they stepped up current

transition efforts.

Despite heavy U.S. pressure, it proposed no date for starting accession

talks with Turkey, by far the biggest and most problematic of the 13

candidate countries. It said Ankara did not yet meet the political criteria

on human rights.

"Thirteen years ago, Berlin was still divided by a wall of shame. The wall

has fallen...and we have rediscovered a historic unity between all our

peoples. Our common destiny is to build our future together," Commission

President Romano Prodi told the European Parliament in presenting the

report.

Enlargement would help cement democracy, the rule of law and respect for

human rights across Europe and open up the fast-growing region fully to EU

investors, he said.

Prodi said he hoped "the historic reunification of our continent will not be

jeopardized" when Ireland votes on October 19 in a repeat referendum on the

Nice Treaty, designed to adapt EU institutions to cope with up to 27

members.

EU Enlargement Commissioner Guenter Verheugen said an Irish "No" could

scupper the entire expansion project.

AVOIDING NATIONALISM

EU officials fear that an Irish rejection would play into the hands of

member states such as France that are at best lukewarm about enlargement,

seen as diluting their influence in the Union and posing a bigger financial

burden.

Prodi called for an information campaign to overcome hostility to

enlargement and highlight the grim alternative.

Central and eastern Europe could otherwise be engulfed by the kind of

nationalism that destroyed the former Yugoslavia.

"Enlargement is our political masterpiece because it will allow us to avoid

all this (destruction)," Prodi said.

Rejecting suggestions that the EU could not afford to expand in the current

global economic climate, he said: "The costs of enlargement is nothing

compared to the costs of not enlarging."

The 10 frontrunners are Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia,

Slovenia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and the small Mediterranean islands of

Cyprus and Malta.

Another hurdle is disagreement among EU member states on how much aid to

offer to the candidates' farmers and poor regions.

But diplomats said the 15 EU leaders should be able to craft a deal on

financing when they discuss the Commission's report at a summit in Brussels

on October 24-25. They will take a final decision on enlargement at a

Copenhagen summit in December.

 

NO WHITEWASH

 

In the report, the Commission was keen to deflect possible criticism that it

has whitewashed the record of the candidates, many of whom still have work

to do in implementing tens of thousands of pages of complex and sometimes

costly law.

Verheugen pledged Brussels would monitor closely candidates' implementation

of EU law right up to the day of accession.

He suggested the EU should be able to invoke "safeguard measures" for two

years after enlargement to prevent any market disruptions within the Union.

The Commission bestowed the status of 'functioning market economy' on

Bulgaria and commended progress toward that goal of its laggard Balkan

neighbor Romania.

The report praised Turkey's recent reform package, which included the

abolition of the death penalty in peacetime and more cultural rights for the

Kurdish minority.

Verheugen told Parliament the EU's strategy of engagement with Turkey was

paying off and raised the prospect of more financial aid for Ankara.

"We will make sure the door remains open for Turkey, but it must not deviate

from the task of bringing about the necessary changes," said the German

commissioner, making clear it was too early to set a date for the start of

negotiations.

The United States urged the EU to recognize Turkish progress on human rights

and give the strategically vital Muslim NATO ally a clear prospect of

accession, saying this would also boost hopes of a peace deal to reunited

Cyprus before it joins the EU.

"We hope that the report is objective and takes recognition of what Turkey

has accomplished," U.S. special envoy on Cyprus Tom Weston told Reuters in

an interview.

"If it points in the direction of a positive future for Turkey with Europe,

meaning ultimate accession, but more generally in its relationship with

Europe...that ought to be helpful in moving forward on the Cyprus issue as

well." (Additional reporting by Marie-Louise Moller, Paul Taylor)

 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._nm/eu_enlargem

ent_dc_4

[aurguplu]

i am posting this on the eve of the elections which swept the AKP into power and put an end to almost all of the politicians active since the 1970s.

 

although this election was about getting rid of the likes of ecevit, yılmaz, çiller etc., which everyone wanted, few people anticipated that there would be such a landslide victory for AKP (everyone knew, though, that it was going to be the clear winner).

 

the recent statement by the german foreign minister joschka fischer (no turkey in eu) also contributed little to anyone's efforts other than that of the islamists.

 

what's gonna happen now? akp has come to power as a single party, an outcome so far favourably received by the financial markets, as it may mean stability. everyone hopes here that akp will have learnt its lessons from past experiences (28th feb) that a brush with the army is not advisable. but then again, the army in turn must have learnt its own lesson, i.e. you cannot rule a country despite its people. rpp (baykal) must have realised that his party got what it got thanks to kemal derviş and not him, and in fact, if he weren't heading the party, it could have got a good deal more.

 

the recent snub by the german foreign minister in the usa (no turkey in eu) must have contributed to akp's success to a certain extent, and this may indeed be regarded as the first occasion where the turkish people made a conscious choice which signals its loss of hope of ever joining the eu.

 

the coming decade may well see a turkey which reinvents itself as a moderately islamic country with a tinge of westernisation and a strong position in the islamic world rather than a pariah desperately trying to join the eu and seeing its dignity dragged through the mud every time.

 

a chinese curse runs: "may you live in interesting times". looks like some chinese cursed us.

[Arpa]

What is hilariously unfunny is that Germany, among many other so called christian western nations have parties called "CHRISTIAN Democrats" Are they the ruling party at the present? Yet when they hear about Islamic or Islamist majority in Turkey, when they hear about Iranians renaming their country Islamic Republic of Iran they cringe. Is there a limit to hypocrisy!!

For that matter the term "holy war" is a totally Christian invention. It was coined during the crusades to eventually be adopted by the Holy(?)Roman Empire. (What was so holy about it? There is not an equivalent term to "holy war" in the Islamic cultures and the Arabic Language. Jihad is often loosely and erroneously translated to mean "holy war". Jihad does not mean anything like "holy war". It simply means "struggle/endeavor".

Of course, the art of demonization was invented long time ago, read that book which some call the Holy Bible. It is still being propagated.. guess by who!!?? Guess who is freely translating "jihad" to mean "holy war"!!

[aurguplu]

day two after the apocalypse

 

so far everything seems to be all right. i have not been ordered to grow a beard and the women at the workplace are not wearing veils.

 

akp is desperately trying to pass itself for a muslim conservative democratic party rather than an islamist or ex-islamist party. they are ready to cooperate with the imf, and this morning baykal and tayyip (chp and akp heads) made a joint statement where they stressed that they would be working together and that their first priority would be to get a date from the eu at copenhagen (which will be very, very difficult in my opinion).

 

the markets have so far responded very favourably to the single party rule that akp will enjoy. if they don't mess up and act as a conservative democrat party as they claim they have turned into, the near future may be bright.

[THOTH]

Ali -

 

Understood all - and good. but don't worry - they will come around eventually (to what we all know that they are). I think your nation is likely soon to be a battleground (OK - maybe still some years away....but...) - so watch yourself. This is not to say that Turkey won't benefit from some stability in the short term (and getting rid of the Yilmaz's and Ecevit's is certainly a good thing. Still - I can't trust the Islamists - and they are fundementally undemocratic - even if they are posturing themselves as such for the time being. But maybe they will adapt (to survive) and stay somewhat moderate - I really have my doubts though. And I can imagine all the creeping little changes they may try to implement in the meanwhile. Good luck!

[aurguplu]

thoth,

 

i agree with everything you say, and have the same fears (like the rest of the nation). but the thing is that these guys had filled the cadres with names from centre right rather than the islamist camp, and are getting out of their way to ensure everyone that they are not islamist.

 

as for the creeping little changes, maybe mine is just wishful thinking, but these guys had had enough fights with the army, and i hope they have understood by now that certain things are just not possible.

 

another significant factor is the fact that the mother of all islamist parties, saadet (that of erbakan) got a mere 2.5 per cent of the vote. the difference between the two is that while the akp guys reinvented themselves as a centre-right party and took guys from other centre right parties, erbakan didn't. he stayed the same as before, and was voted out of politics.

 

we are cautiously optimistic for the time being.

 

cheers,

[nairi]

Arpa jan, they're Christian DEMOCRATS, unlike these Islamic parties which are not. I don't know about AKP, but I wouldn't be surprised if Turkey's cabinet falls faster than the Dutch one.

[nairi]

Also, Europe is as wary of the right-wing shift on their own territory as they are about it elsewhere.

[-e-]

Is the TURKISH-HALLOWEEN over or they just changed a mask? It takes a life time to gain a trust. The turks have changed their mask several times in the past 100 years. Why have they done it again? What kind of a bloody plan do they have now???

[aurguplu]

eduard,

 

they don't have a bloody plan or anything. the country was run by incompetent f*cks since özal died, (and actually way before that) now these f*cks are out of politics.

 

postwar (wwii) turkish politics were characterised by a struggle between the westernising secularist forces (the centre left) and the populist mavericks that fed on the ignorance and frustrations of the masses. the mavericks kept winning in the ballots, and kept screwing the country, only to be ousted by the military (the watchdog) four times, and it was the turkish people who lost out. we have had a bloody 'nough, and sent all of those responsible for this who are still alive and not yet out of politics (türkeş is dead, demirel was ousted in disgrace three years ago, erbakan is barred from politics by law, so this had left ecevit, çiller, yılmaz, and erbakan again as he was still plotting behind the scenes) to oblivion.

 

our fury buried them. the akp? well, it is a price we have to pay, i am afraid. if they have the brains of a worm they wouldn't play islamist and dare to have a brush with the army. in fact, if they really turn out to have mutated into a centre-right party rather than the islamist party that they were, they may even win the next elections.

 

they have no excuses: single-party rule, recovering economy, cooperative opposition (nothing else they can do), and so far cautiously optimistic international reception. what more could they ask for?

[-e-]

ali, please...don't even go there. do you mean to insult the people's intelligence? do you talk about the same ozal who said "we'll remind the armenians 1915"? no one has ever seen changes in the turkish value system. you guys keep changing your mask, but your true identity ramains the same. in an interview to azeri newspaper 'zerkalo',, your new elected leader said 'the occupied territories must be returned to azerbaijan. and now the liberated artsak is an azeri's land, huh? do you guys value the land more than the people...is this guy calling for a war? hey, how about liberating the armenian territoris taken by the bloody bastards? what if we think about saving the armenian churches that are being destroyed for the past 80 years?

[Boghos]

Turkey is an odd country where the guardians of democracy are the armed forces. Even many western educated and open minded Turks believe that the military have such an important role in preserving what they believe is democracy. This is such plain and obvious symptom of how far from any sort of democratic society Turkey is.

 

As to EU, they should simply give up. They will never ever be accepted. The reasons are plentiful. It is just a minority of the middle and upper middle classes that live in a delusional state believing that their country will ever join the EU.

[THOTH]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

Turkey is an odd country where the guardians of democracy are the armed forces.

---

Yes agree - though one could make an argument (from a certain perspective) that the armed forces of the U.S. (or of the West in general) are the guardians of Democracy...of course this is normally interpreted to mean from external threats to such...

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

Even many western educated and open minded Turks believe that the military have such an important role in preserving what they believe is democracy.

---

Some key points. First this statement is true and the belief is perhaps true. Key point - "what they believe is democracy"...though in fact - considering the region, the religion, and the history of the Turks - this situation is an incredible thing in itself. And all "democracies" have their own particualr checks to ensure that tyranny is kept at bay...and no democracy is pure.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

This is such plain and obvious symptom of how far from any sort of democratic society Turkey is.

---

Sure - they fall far short in many areas (particualry areas of cultural "sensitivty" including Armenian and minority issues) - yet the semblance (of democracy) is there...including not only diverse political parties but a fairly open press (again with certain limitations). I would argue that this is better then most nations in the world and it does seem to be improving as well. Obviously they are still far from Europe and North America - but not unlike (many) South American nations in a sense - no?

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

As to EU, they should simply give up. They will never ever be accepted. The reasons are plentiful.

---

This is perhaps true (for now/short term) - but I think that it is a great shame (for the Turks mostly - though I think [over the long haul] there is great risk to Europe/the West as well - in shutting Turkey out of the EU). I have tried to explain to some neophytyes the (mostly non-rational IMO) hostility towards the EU felt by most Turks...when it is clear that if the reforms and actions needed for EU membership were enacted Turkey would be a much improved nation for its citizens. (I include Genocide recognition in this category - though perhaps this is a less obvious one).

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

It is just a minority of the middle and upper middle classes that live in a delusional state believing that their country will ever join the EU.

---

Well "ever" is perhaps a long time. I understand many of the difficulties faced (including just plain predjudice/dislike of Turks/Muslims etc) and Turkey's many shortcommings. Still, never can say never sometime, regardless...

[Boghos]

Winston,

 

The armed forces are not the "guardian" of democracy in any democratic country. They don´t unseat elected representatives nor ban parties.

 

Of course democracies have numerous checks and balances. The Courts and the Legislative being the most obvious. They do not answer to the military.

 

They are unlike many Latin American countries indeed. The military have next to no importance in most countries with the exception of Venezuela and a few other very minor players. If you have a different perspective and especially facts let´s have it. Not that this has any relevence to the discussion at hand.

 

As to freedom of the press you seem to have a slightly biased position. Just look at any credible source for journalistic freedom. I will leave the issue of language aside for the moment but just remind you of a story of a Kurdish student that asked for a Kurdish language course and was jailed and tortured. After Turkey complied with EU demands, by the way. Shall I post the link ?

 

Freedom exists mostly within Ataturk´s ideological legacy, whatever that is deemed to be.

 

I understand your feelings of sympathy towards Turkey. But of course it blurs objectivity.

 

What, if I may ask, is the danger of not having Turkey in the EU ?

 

When I say "ever" I mean of course in a decent time frame, decades for example. "Never say never" is just a cliche.

[Guest Fadi]

quote:

---

Turkey is an odd country where the guardians of democracy are the armed forces. Even many western educated and open minded Turks believe that the military have such an important role in preserving what they believe is democracy. This is such plain and obvious symptom of how far from any sort of democratic society Turkey is.

---

Thats the clear sign of the Turkish society weakness, and the worst irony of all. How someone can be for democracy, and in the same time accept a such a militaristic control over a state, a military forces that has the control over a government that is supposed to be ellected to represent the population. Thats a form of a hidden dictatorial regime.

 

On a brighter note, I am happy that an Islamic party has been elected, for sure islamic values are more human then Kemalistic nationalist sick mentalities, and if people think that by having elected an islamic party Turkey will close itself from the outside world, then I think they are disconnected from reality, moderate religigious values are far more compatible with the rest of the world than a Kemalistic nationalism and arrogance.

 

The next intelligent step, would be for the government to put an end to this paranoia and over-exagerated militarisation of Turkey, and put the military as what it should be, rather than a government in itself.

[Boghos]

Excellent point. This has been one of the major issues in Turkish politics: how to break away from Kemalism but remaining in one piece. Self-ascribed "liberals" believe that the military can really protect democracy from the threat of so-called radical Islam. That´s ridiculous.

[THOTH]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

Winston,

 

The armed forces are not the "guardian" of democracy in any democratic country. They don´t unseat elected representatives nor ban parties.

---

Well understood. I was commenting on the term and its use. Guardians of democracy in reference to keepijng the world/west safe from totalitarian's like Hitler & the commies etc. (external focus) Of course this is a different usage. And if you ever were to have as much contact with the US military as I have had then you would come to understand that they certainly see themselves as preatorian guards.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

Of course democracies have numerous checks and balances. The Courts and the Legislative being the most obvious. They do not answer to the military.

---

Agreed. However, I am not sure any of us really knows what true democracy is - and there is certainly no true expression of it at the national level anywere. Each supposed democracy is a facimile of some sort - an interpretation - using different models (from a common ancestor/roots - Locke/Hobbs/Mill etc) - but in each case rules for representation (political parties), for forming governments, making laws etc have been enacted that set the stage for what is allowable and what is not - often - particualrly in the US - with the eye on ensuring that no radicalism of the day will ever take over and such. Very often I feel that my views/interests (that I know are shared by many others) are not very well represented in (my national/state or local government - nor will they likely ever be within the (essentially) two party system practiced by the US. Certainly if these views were to gain hold in the mainstream or if those who felt as I do (hypothetically) were to make great effort to be heard - then it may come to be so - and there are a number of avenues for this. So perhaps we are at least near to democracy in some sense - and certainly nearer then Turkey is - how could I not agree with that?

 

As for Turkey - I don't disagree with your assertions whatsover - I the final sense...though in the practical day-to-day sense I think things are perhaps less bleak then the picture you paint. Certainly I think we all agree what the significant problems/shortfalls are - certain expression strictly curtailed, rampant human rights abuses and the draconion power of the Army is certainly less then ideal.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

They are unlike many Latin American countries indeed. The military have next to no importance in most countries with the exception of Venezuela and a few other very minor players. If you have a different perspective and especially facts let´s have it. Not that this has any relevence to the discussion at hand.

---

In this case I was mearly refering to the tendency of South American militaries to be party to coups and such (much like the Turkish military has been). Certainly we have seen this fairly often, lets see - Brazil! - 1964, Bolivia 1970, Chile 1973, Argentina 1976, Honduras 1984, Venezuala 1986 (to present - and like you said much like Turkey), Panama and Guatamala (in general/various), Paraguay (sort of)...I don't know - but when I think South America I think (pretty much) of the military hanging around waiting to step in. I mean look at Columbia right now - etc. Sure there are perhaps some legitimate reasons...but still in a sense I see many situations simlar (in many respects) to Turkey.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

As to freedom of the press you seem to have a slightly biased position. Just look at any credible source for journalistic freedom. I will leave the issue of language aside for the moment but just remind you of a story of a Kurdish student that asked for a Kurdish language course and was jailed and tortured. After Turkey complied with EU demands, by the way. Shall I post the link ?

---

No (no need) - I don't dispute this at all believe me. However on the surface - within the mainstream - there is much open debate and critism of the Government etc in Turkey. Sure its not a totaly free press - and the type of abuses of which you speak are rampant and well known - but its not Iraq for instance...and on the surface it has all the appearence/feeling of an open society...but I ageree - it certainly is not.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

Freedom exists mostly within Ataturk´s ideological legacy, whatever that is deemed to be.

---

Correct - and this is a big problem. They are constantly trying to justify based on this model - and in some cases it seems the results are pretty twisted. Makes me think of "Mountain Turks" and "happy to be a Turk" - that sort of thing...

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

I understand your feelings of sympathy towards Turkey. But of course it blurs objectivity.

---

No - I am objective regarding Turkey - my "sympathys" only extend so far. What I feel is that most Armenians are so anti-Turkey that their perspective is bluurred and they are quick to critisize and single Turkey out - etc. I fully understand this of course - but its often difficult to have a conversation with an Armenian concerning Turkey because of all the biases/baggage. Hey - I certainly don't regard the Turks as saints - not even close. And I feel very personally affected - as an Armenian - by the legacy of Kemalism in Turkey...at least the aspect of it that is extending the work of the CUP (by denying the past and with its twisted/narrow attitude concerning minority isues - past and present).

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

What, if I may ask, is the danger of not having Turkey in the EU ?

---

With Turkey in the EU they will be bought in - beholden...less likely to rock the boat. Additionally just to obtain membership their society will have to change in positive ways (including lessening of military controls I would think). Overall these influences will spur Turkey to become more European/Western and more tied to Europe/the West. Without this I think there is more of a chance for a radicallized Turkey that is more of a wild card and that could one day turn moere towars the East and the more radical Islamist regimes - as well as internally move this direction (less likely if tied into the EU - IMO)

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boghos:

When I say "ever" I mean of course in a decent time frame, decades for example. "Never say never" is just a cliche.

---

OK - got it...then I think we agree then...LOL. However I also believe that reality can change in a day. We often cannot predict what new forces/circumstance may suddenly pop up and drive things - one way or another. But I do agree with you - with eveything stacked against Turkey as it is - both internally and externally - not a chance it would seem.

[Boghos]

It is true that many Armenians are anti-Turkey or anti-Turk or both. But that doesn´t mean that one should start with that as a premise when discussing Turkey with any Armenian, as you would be commiting the same mistake.

 

I think your view of Latin America is outdated, very outdated. All the relevant countries have very little influence of the armed forces these days. The case of Brazil that you referred to and that I happen to know quite well is quite clear: the armed forces have gone back to the barracks and are not coming back. We could discuss this in great detail if you want.

 

Historically the armed forces have been one of the few ways of advancement for the middle class, in social and political terms, this is no longer the case. Other countries: in Mexico the military have had very little importance over time. Chile is a case where the military are still somewhat influential, but not to the degree that it is in Turkey. Argentina: major headcount and budgetary reduction after the dictatorship ended, very little political influence.

 

But my point is the acceptance of the military as the guardian of democracy even by liberal sectors of society is an example of how far Turkey is from an open society. Not the fact that the miltary may intervene in society.

 

Moreover I was in Istanbul when Turkesh died, the newspapers treated it as the death of a nice old nationalist uncle. It is a society skewed to the right and with a military-militaristic bent.

 

Further on Turkey and the EU: it would naturally benefit mostly Turkey. But the issues politically within Turkey are so tremendously complex and there is clearly no desire from all European countries to see Turkey in the EU, that it will not happen. Simple as that.

 

Turkey interests me a lot. I have been to the country several times. There are many things that I like about it, many that I dislike and some that I abhorr.

 

Relax chief, you have no monopoly on ethics and morality.

 

[ November 07, 2002, 08:32 AM: Message edited by: Boghos ]

[aurguplu]

eduard,

 

1. we don't wear masks, especially when dealing with the enemy (and you guys are not exactly in the friends category, you know that, don't you?).

 

2. i don't mean to insult anyone's intelligence or anything, but the following remarks may be offensive to some, even though that's not the intention (i repeat, that's not the intention):

 

we are a major regional power 70 million strong. our current problems are great and many, but the armenian issue is not one of them. the armenian problem recurs only on every 24th april or whenever turkey attempts to get something from the eu/usa/russia that these guys don't want to give, or when they want to wrench something out of us that we don't want to give. you are a pawn in their hands. sorry to say this, but your interests are - and have never been - anyone else's priority (the same could of course be said of many other nations, including us).

 

you have to realise that we don't have a problem with you, but you have a problem with us. i am one of those few turks who concede that we share by far the greater part of the blame in that "problem" (the ag), and are prepared to do what we can to solve/make good for it, but putting up with insults or arrogance on your part is not one of them.

 

so i suggest you take a close look at us and just see: we don't have a mask, we have a face, it's an ugly one, especially seen from your perspective, but at least we are not trying to hide anything. we also do not see any need to hide anything from you, or plainly speaking, couldn't be bothered with it: you are not that important for us.

 

sorry if this sounds offensive or arrogant (i intended neither), but things had to be put into the right perspective.

 

regards,

[aurguplu]

just a few comments on the above discussion (thoth, boghos, Domino) re turkey:

 

1. i don't know of a single case in history where democracy was established without fits and starts. it takes time, and people make mistakes. the reason why it is taking such a long time in turkey is that the traditional lifestyle in turkey did not give rise to democracy: it was imposed by the western influenced military (what an irony). you may criticise the turkish regime in general and the army in particular for not being very democratic, but hey, you shouldn't forget that your average anatolian peasant left to his own devices is a good deal less so. so it comes to choosing between the lesser of the two evils, and the army is the lesser one in many people's opinion.

 

2. re turkey and the eu: i share many people's doubts about turkey ever joining the eu, and unlike most people, i believe that religion is the key factor here: no matter how much turkey reforms, no matter how prosperous it becomes, no matter this, no matter that, nothing short of wholesale baptism will ever get turkey into the eu. the eu does not really want to tell this to turkey that bluntly and thereby spark a reaction (and end up with an iran next to its borders), but they just won't take us. i can't really blame them for it: after all, japan is all very civilised and everything but it just simply isn't europe, and the same goes for turkey. europe is not just a certain lifestyle and code of conduct: it is also a history, a bunch of prejudices, attitudes, religion, culture and what not, in short, a past, and turks weren't in that past, other than as a threat. turks acquired european aspirations only when they started to get down the hill, and i suspect that they would leave these aspirations if they realise that they can get up the hill again wihtout necessarily becoming a part of europe.

 

also, another crucial factor is that neither the arabs nor the persians, who are after all our real cultural and civilisational "family" are attractive bedfellows. if they ever show signs of improving, turkey might prefer to move to play a prominent role in a region where it naturally belongs to. for this, of course, iraq and palestine are issues that are to be sorted.

 

i think something of this kind will happen

in the coming decades and turkey will carve itself a place there if it cannot make it into the eu, which is almost a certainty. this wouldn't necessarily be a bad move if these countries adopt democracy prior to that.

[15levels]

Ali, what is the population of Turkey and how many people are serving in the armed forces? Please in numbers and percentage if possible. (its just a question).

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Rouben