16. August 2000

1. - Reuters - "Turkish police raid hunger strike homes, four dead":

ISTANBUL / by Mustafa Ozer

The bodies of four people were dragged away Monday after Turkish police raided an Istanbul neighbourhood where leftists have been on hunger strike to protest against prison reforms.
The raid was the latest attempt by Turkey to deal with a protest that has left more than 40 people dead of starvation, further stained the country's human rights record and sparked a suicide bomb attack in September that killed four people.

An official at the Turkey-based Human Rights Association (IHD) said the four people were killed in the raids. State-run Anatolian news agency reported the victims had set themselves on fire. Neither organization could provide details.

A police officer at the scene told Reuters that authorities had found the victims already dead underneath their beds after security forces entered the homes.

Istanbul's health care administrator Osman Karaaslan was quoted by Anatolian as saying 10 people suffered burns and carbon-monoxide poisoning after setting themselves on fire.

Witnesses in Istanbul's Kucuk Armutlu district said police used armoured cars, tear gas and batons to enter private homes and pull out protesters. Some of the detained were apparently weakened by months of hunger strike and carried to hospitals in waiting ambulances.
``Police were firing their weapons at random,'' the IHD official said, adding that at least one protester died by self-immolation and a home had been burned to the ground.

Tear gas swirled around the low houses, mixing with fog and smoke from fires lit by the protesters. The raids followed press reports accusing police of having no sway in the neighbourhood.

Hunger strike toll at 42

The security forces would not say how many people they had detained and Istanbul hospital officials declined to give details of casualties admitted.

Hundreds of leftist prisoners and a few dozen of their relatives have been taking minimal nutrition since late last year in protest over new cell-based prisons that replace large dormitory wards.
The death toll from the hunger strike has reached 42.

Protesters, joined by human rights activists and some European critics, have said the new maximum-security jails isolate inmates, putting them at risk of police brutality.
Allegations of torture by Turkish police are common.

A suicide bomber claimed by the Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front (DHKP-C) killed himself in September along with two policemen and an Australian tourist in an attack the militants said was in protest over prison raids.

Last December, authorities stormed jails across the country in a bid to end the hunger strike and force the transfer of inmates to the new high-security jails. Two soldiers and 30 prisoners died in those raids.

The hunger strikers take sugar and some nutrients in order to prolong their lives and their protests.

Turkish justice officials say the new jails with their smaller cells meet European standards and are needed to break the influence of radical political groups over crowded prison dormitories that are run beyond the control of police.

---

2. - Turkiye - "Turkey at a crossroads":

Columnist Yilmaz Oztuna comments on the recent developments concerning Cyprus and the state reforms.

Important members of the government issued significant messages over the weekend. Both national and foreign policies are at crossroads. Foreign Minister Ismail Cem stressed that the Cyprus problem was urgent and would force us to make a choice. Although he stated that there were two choices before us, it was understood that not making any concessions was the one favoured. The connection between concessions in Cyprus and the European Union is known by all. Deputy Prime Minister Devlet Bahceli spoke more clearly.

He said that there would be no concessions on Cyprus and that they would not accept any linkage of this issue with European Union membership. He accused the European states of sheltering terrorism and of not understanding the importance of the issue despite several warnings from Turkey. He indicated that there was no evidence to the effect that Europe's stance on the issue had changed. The European states which tainted the civilization they tout and uphold above everything else by staying mere spectators to the Bosnian tragedy fully deserve Bahceli's accusations.

Deputy Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz stated that we would not be able to find any cure for our troubles unless we carried out state reform. His suggestions on decreasing the number of the personnel working in the state sector and on economic measures were on target. However, his suggestions on the election system were mistaken. These suggestions would not increase the votes of the Motherland Party (ANAP), but instead decrease them. Political mistakes have dealt blows to the votes ANAP has received. We expect meaningful and comprehensive messages from the opposition parties as well.

---

3. - Sabah - "Sending Troops":

Retired Ambassador Sukru Elekdag comments on the decision to send Turkish troops to Afghanistan

Ankara's decision to send troops to Afghanistan was evaluated as returning the favor for US economic support to the Turkish government.

Although this view may have some value, if the issue is assessed objectively far from any domestic considerations, the decision to send troops to Afghanistan is correct and in line with Turkish national interests. Turkey spent the last 15 years in an atmosphere of terrorism which harmed the country as much as a war, and it thus called on the whole world to recognize that terrorism was a menace threatening humanity and stated that the basic condition for success in eradicating terrorism was international solidarity and cooperation. Therefore, the US launching of a campaign to establish a global coalition based on international solidarity and cooperation in the fight against terrorism coincides with Turkey's interests.

This is a legal and ethical duty for Turkey to fulfil its obligations to NATO. Turkey's decision has a great political significance which cannot be compared to its military contribution. The operation waged against Al Qaida and Taleban in Afghanistan gave the impression that the Christian West had begun a war against Islam. By taking part on the side of the West with its military contributions, Muslim Turkey has shown that the operation is not against Islam but terrorism. From a geopolitical point of view, we can see that the decision supports Turkey's strategic interests concerning the Middle East and Central Asia.

The most impressive result of the Turkish decision to send troops to Afghanistan has been to display its exemplary achievement as the only secular, democratic republic which has melded democratic values with those of Islam, distinguishing itself from the outdated, radical mentality slavishly followed by some Muslim countries.

---

4. - Anadolu -"Target of 1974 peace operation was to prevent enosis'':

KIZIL CAHAMAM

Kursat Eser, the co-chairman of the Joint Parliamentary Commission (JPC), which is the dialogue organ between the Grand National Assembly (TBMM) and the European Parliament, said on Sunday that the target of Cyprus Peace Operation was to prevent enosis (union with Greece), noting that, ''however, with the method of Greek Cypriot side's enterance to the EU, re-establishment of enosis is in question.''

Eser, who is also the parliamentarian of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) from Aksaray province, attended Central Executive Board meeting of MHP, and spoke to journalists about the developments on Cyprus issue.

When journalists recalled that Cyprus issue was discussed during today's meeting, Eser said Cyprus has a strategic and historic importance.

Pointing out 1959 and 1960 agreements, Eser said, ''1974 Peace Operation prevented enosis. Now that they try to provide enosis by this way. Re-establishment of enosis is in question with the method of Greek Cypriot administration's entrance to the EU.''

Eser said enosis will not be allowed anyway.

Pointing out that Turkey should attribute great importance to its own security, Eser said, ''continuation of current status of Cyprus is extremely important not only for Turkey and but also for the developments recorded in Eastern Mediterranean.''

---

5. - Stuttgarter Zeitung - "Reality will strike home soon":

STRASBOURG / by Thomas Gack

The Euro parliament strikes a balance cautious in tone, but tough on the facts - in relation to Turkey. The EU Parliament has little interest in provocation. They are avoiding conflict in light of the growing strategic importance of Turkey. But the conditions for membership remain firm.

As the members of the European Parliament in Strasbourg streamed into the assembly hall in the morning, they carried in their briefcases a letter from the Turkish Ambassador which had been sent to all 626 parliamentarians, and which recommended they make no mention of the theme of Armenia and genocide during the debate on Turkey.

And in fact, the parliamentary rapporteur, Alain Lamassoure, was very receptive to this request. In his report, which was adopted on Thursday in Strasbourg with a large majority, there was only indirect mention of the genocide that the Turks had committed against the Armenians. For, after 11 September, the only Islamic member-state in NATO plays a key role in the linkage to the Middle East. The coalition against terrorism needs the Turks as middlemen. Their strategic / political role has thus grown significantly since the most recent terrorist incidents.

"The European Parliament doesn't want to provoke Turkey in this situation. Consequently, the unpleasant truths are packaged in a friendly manner" says the Turkey expert of the Christian Democrats, Werner Langen. On the facts of the matter, however, the European Parliament remains rigid: Turkey is still a long way from fulfilling the so-called Copenhagen Criteria, which are a precondition for beginning negotiations on accession to the EU: respect for human rights, democracy, and being a state of law.

Human rights continue to be trampled upon in Turkey just as before. The Kurds are still refused minority rights, and the Kurdish identity is still denied by Ankara. An investigation into torture in Turkey would establish "horrific results", according to the report. Torture and degrading treatment are "still the order of the day." The right to free expression remains restricted. "Even today many thousands of people are in prison for crimes that according to our laws would be classified as crimes of opinion" stated the Euro parliament. Newspapers are banned, opposition parties are closed down, and opposition is quite officially classified as "terrorism' by police officials. And even worse: the chairwoman of the Turkish parliamentary commission to investigate torture was prosecuted as a result of her work.

The reforms that Ankara has introduced, according to the Euro parliament, are too meagre. The Lamassoure report states critically that "The results remain far behind the current democratic norms." And further: "There is in general a deep gulf between the 'good intentions' and the actual practice in terms of human rights." There are in certain areas "real progress", but also, in others, "delays, and even steps backwards". And the Turkish Constitution continues to provide "no appropriate framework of rights that guarantee a state of law and basic freedoms."

The Parliament is particularly critical of the Turks' "National Security Council", through which the military exercises massive influence over politics. Thereafter, according to the Lamassoure report, comes the fact that corruption in all spheres of the state and the society.

---

6. - Daily Star - "A strategic boon for Turkish regime":

Fate is smiling on country for a fourth time - Government stands to benefit greatly from the 'war on terror' by currying favour and advancing its regional and domestic agenda

BEIRUT / by Mohammad Noureddine

Fortune is smiling on Turkey for the fourth time in its history. On the previous three occasions, the country benefited greatly. But the current opportunity risks being squandered unless its leaders prove adept at reading unfolding international developments.

In 1920, the Treaty of Sevres provided for a dismembered Turkey to be parcelled out between the Big Powers, the Armenians and the Kurds.

But under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, Ankara made deft use of a deal with the English enabling Turkey to be liberated and unified in exchange for undergoing a strategic Western-oriented ideological transformation. The upshot was the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne that drew Turkey's present borders and prevented the realization of its Armenian and Kurdish nightmares.

The second opportunity arose when World War II ended and the world split into rival communist and capitalist camps. Given its location, Turkey became NATO's spearhead against the Soviet Union, and its membership of the alliance safeguarded its territorial integrity for the next half century.

With the end of the Cold War and collapse of the USSR, many thought Turkey's strategic value to the Western camp would diminish or die. But the emergence of new troublespots in its vicinity (the Balkans, Middle East and Caucasus), and of newly independent states with ethnic, linguistic, cultural and religious bonds to Turkey (Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan) reaffirmed the importance of Turkey's role to US policy in Eurasia. Thus it remained a cherished ally throughout the 1990s, further bolstering that status by forging a military alliance with Israel in February 1996.

The Sept. 11 attacks on Washington and New York have provided Turkey with an unmistakable fourth opportunity to do two things: To demonstrate its importance to whatever moves Washington makes against Afghanistan, Iraq or other hostile groups and to exploit those moves to serve Turkey's own regional objectives and vindicate its stance on the question of domestic terrorism and the "Islamist threat."

On the former count, Turkey has consistently served as a launching pad for the implementation of American policies in its vicinity. While it does not adjoin Afghanistan, it has historic bonds with the country that have been sustained since Ataturk's days. It maintains a presence there in the form of health and educational institutions, intelligence activities and even military training, and is particularly close to the ethnic Uzbek minority currently led by General Rashid Dustom. These factors combined enable Turkey to play a major role in Afghanistan.

Turkey is also the only Muslim member of NATO, at a time when the US is engaged in a campaign against an Islamic country and needs Islamic support like never before to erase the "crusade" label which President George W. Bush's slip-of-the-tongue attached to it. And it is the NATO member closest geographically to Afghanistan.

When the alliance invoked Article Five of its Charter for the first time in its history, Turkey was bound to commit itself to acting, when needed, as its staging post for attacks on Afghanistan. Moreover, its own forces have more experience than any other in NATO in waging guerrilla warfare in tough topographical and climatic conditions, gained fighting the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) inside the country and in northern Iraq. And it goes without saying that any future American war on Iraq would be impossible without Turkish support.

The events of Sept. 11 have come as a boon for the regime in Turkey in respect of its own agenda too. By identifying terrorism and extremist Islamist movements as its paramount enemies on the world stage, the US delighted Ankara, for a number of reasons.

For one, NATO's invocation of Article Five deeming an attack against one member-state to be an attack against all greatly strengthens Ankara's hand vis-a-vis the PKK. It enables it to demand that other NATO members treat any future PKK attacks as terrorism and as attacks on themselves, a demand they would be unable to turn down without seeming to apply double standards.
Ankara lost no time exploiting this state of affairs, presenting NATO members with a comprehensive report on the presence of pro-PKK elements and groups in Germany and alleged PKK training camps in Greece.

Moreover, while Kemalist ideology defined Kurdish separatism as the principal threat to Turkey's national security, the Kurdish "threat" has since been relegated to second place and overtaken by the "reactionary (read Islamist movements) threat." This has been emphatically the case since the famous military edicts of Feb. 28, 1997, targeting the government of Islamist Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan.

The role assumed by NATO in the US war on terror has a further gratifying consequence for Turkey: sidelining the idea of establishing a unified army for the European Union (EU). Turkey was excluded from efforts to establish such a force, on grounds that it is not an EU member. But in the wake of the changes set in motion on Sept. 11, it would be difficult to continue excluding it if such efforts were to be revived. Ankara's feelings about the matter were best expressed by retired General Cevik Bir, who gloated in the wake of the latest global developments that the place for the proposed European army was "in the dustbin of history."

Turkey's big weakness in its relations with Europe is, of course, the prospect of its admission to the EU being linked to a settlement of the Cyprus issue. A major Turkish role in implementing US policy against international terror could well generate US pressure on Europe to be more accommodating to Turkey over Cyprus.

Given all the gains Turkey stands to make, the confusion and hesitation shown by members of the coalition government especially Premier Bulent Ecevit over the degree to which Ankara should help Washington in its Afghan war came as something of a surprise.

It is only this week that the government decided to deploy a special forces unit of around 90 members for the Afghan war. A government statement said the aim of the mission was "surveillance, guiding the Northern Alliance, supporting humanitarian missions, protecting innocent people and helping the evacuation of civilians when necessary."

Turkey has always turned in the American orbit, and will have to continue doing so if it wants to reap all the aforementioned gains and secure continued financial backing. Bearing in mind that it is not the government that makes the real decisions in Turkey, the country seems set to play an active part in the war while simultaneously demanding a place at the negotiating table and a share of the spoils.

Ankara is poised to seize the "fourth opportunity" for all it is worth. Otherwise, the consequences could be dire for the future of both regime and country.