08.
August 2002
2. "International coalition against war on Iraq rapidly emerging", With each passing day the Bush administration escalates its war of words against Iraq, making a military campaign increasingly likely. But the situation on the international scene is very different from the conditions obtaining when George Bush senior went to war against Iraq in 1991.
3. "Leader: Iraqi Kurds won't 'blindly' join U.S. front", a key Iraqi opposition figure said Wednesday his group would not "blindly" commit to any U.S. plans to topple Saddam Hussein.
4. "Dervis paves way for Turkish alliance", In the unpredictable world of Turkish politics, there is one player that stands firm, lending a guiding hand and guaranteeing the principles of the secular state it vows to defend at all costs.
5. "ANALYSIS - Military stands firm in mire of Turkish politics", In the unpredictable world of Turkish politics, there is one player that stands firm, lending a guiding hand and guaranteeing the principles of the secular state it vows to defend at all costs.
6. "Turkish labor minister resigns in row over workers' rights", Turkey's Labor Minister Yasar Okuyan has resigned amid controversy over a bill aiming to expand the rights of workers in line with European Union standards, deputy Prime Minister Sukru Sina Gurel said Wednesday.
Dear reader,
Due to the holiday time our "Flash Bulletin" will not be forwarded to email addresses from August 1, 2002 until August 25, 2002. It can be viewed, however, right here in the internet at www.flash-bulletin.de as usual.
1. - Reuters - "Turkey Vows to Push IMF Deal Through Polls":
Istanbul / August 08, 2002 / by Steve Bryant
Turkey has promised the IMF that despite the political
vacuum of looming elections it will press ahead with what reforms it
can under a $16 billion loan deal, including the privatization of huge
state banks.
"While early elections could delay legislative reforms, the government
remains committed to timely implementation of those aspects of policy
strategy that are the prerogative of the executive branch," Turkey
said in a letter of intent to the fund released on Thursday.
The letter was matched by a separate appendix from the leaders of Prime
Minister Bulent Ecevit's stalled coalition, which has called general
elections on November 3, pledging loyalty to the loan pact.
A tranche of $1.1 billion from the loan package was disbursed on Wednesday.
Acknowledging slight slippage on some targets for privatization of the
lumbering state banks that lay at the heart of its recent financial
crisis, Turkey promised to press ahead with their sale.
"Working with the World Bank, we will now prepare the banks for
privatization," Turkey told the fund in its latest letter of intent
under a $16 billion loan deal
The letter promised a sale of state-owned Halk Bank by the first quarter
of 2003 and a second attempt to sell Vakifbank in the second quarter
of the same year.
"We will also seek outside assistance for the privatization of
Ziraat (bank) and to sell it later as conditions permit," the letter,
signed by Economy Minister Kemal Dervis, said.
It said Turkey had asked the IMF to waive Turkey's failure to meet a
target to close 800 branches of state banks, "which was missed
by a narrow margin -- with 788 closures, we fell just 12 short."
ON TRACK TO MEET TARGETS
The letter of intent said Turkey remained on track to
meet the fund's targets for 2002, including cutting annual inflation
to 35 percent and achieving three percent growth.
It also promised privatizations of a number of state-owned firms, including
refinery Tupras, and action to prepare state firms such as TEKEL, the
tobacco and alcohol monopoly, for sale.
The letter also pledged to continue preparing legislation, particularly
tax reform bills, that would be sent to parliament to await the next
government, likely to be formed late this year or early in 2003.
2. - TheJordan Times - "International coalition against war on Iraq rapidly emerging":
August 08, 2002 / by Michael Jansen
With each passing day the Bush administration escalates its war of words
against Iraq, making a military campaign increasingly likely. But the
situation on the international scene is very different from the conditions
obtaining when George Bush senior went to war against Iraq in 1991.
George Bush senior had a casus belli, Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. He
could also claim the moral high ground. He assembled a coalition which
gave his assault on Iraq both international and Arab cover. And, Kuwait,
Saudi Arabia and Japan had agreed to pick up the $60 billion bill for
the US-led offensive. Bush senior was not obliged to consider the post-war
scene in Iraq because his objective was to drive the Iraqi army from
Kuwait not — at least not necessarily — to secure “regime
change”. Finally, Bush senior made a serious effort to court the
Arab world.
George Bush junior has no credible casus belli. Iraq has made no aggressive move towards anyone. The threat posed by weapons the US cannot prove Iraq possesses does not justify a war. Iraq's neighbours do not feel threatened and have, in fact, reconciled and achieved a fair degree of rapprochement with Baghdad.
George Bush junior cannot claim the moral high ground because his administration has repudiated international treaties and institutions designed to regulate nuclear weaponry, environmental pollution, the use of landmines, and the conduct of military campaigns. His isolationist unilateralism has antagonised the traditional European allies of the US and further alienated members of the international community which normally keep their distance from Washington's doings. Today an international coalition against a US war on Iraq is rapidly emerging. Bush junior can only claim to have the reluctant support of British Prime Minister Tony Blair who does not enjoy the backing of either his own Labour party or the British public on this issue.
Germany, France, Italy and Spain have made it clear they will not contribute troops to “Gulf War II”. Russia, which went along with “Gulf War I”, flatly opposes the idea. Japan has said that it would not back any action that does not have a Security Council mandate.
The Arab countries which joined Bush senior's coalition — Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Oman, Morocco, Kuwait and Syria — have flatly rejected a new campaign. The Beirut Arab summit in March tried to head off such a possibility by effecting a reconciliation between Iraq and Kuwait and warning that an attack against any Arab country will be seen as an attack on all.
The Arab leader responsible for these two decisions was Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah, who has deeply upset the Bush administration by refusing to permit US forces to launch attacks on Iraq (and Afghanistan) from bases in the kingdom. His Majesty King Abdullah has taken the same line. Their rejection makes it all the more difficult for other Arab countries to cooperate with the US.
George Bush junior does not have external financial backers for his war against Iraq which could cost more than $80 billion.
Finally, the current Bush administration is determined to wage war without reckoning post-war costs. Indeed, President George Bush made it clear while campaigning for the top job that his administration would not engage in peacekeeping and nation-building. However, failure to do so in Iraq could be disastrous.
Last week, in testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a retired US army officer, who now works for a Washington think-tank, put forward some estimates. Colonel Scott Feil, formerly head of the strategy division in the joint chiefs-of-staff, said that 75,000 troops would have to be deployed as peacekeepers if the present government was removed. This would cost $16 billion in the first year. The mission would require special operation units, airborne troops, infantry brigades, armoured divisions and trainers. US troops could face threats from Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni factions intent on settling old scores and securing territorial and political advantages. US forces could also have to deal with Turkey, which has long sought to occupy Kirkuk and Mosul and the nearby oilfields, and Iran, which has ambitions in southern Iraq.
Finally, George Bush junior has made no effort to show goodwill towards the Arabs.
Indeed, he has done everything to antagonise them. As soon as he took office, Bush distanced his administration from the effort to secure a negotiated settlement between the Palestinians and Israel. Consequently the progress towards a deal reached during the last weeks of the Clinton administration was lost. Furthermore, Bush has backed the war of attrition against the Palestinians being waged by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, the “butcher of Beirut”.
Instead of curbing Sharon, Bush has said that Israel has
a right to “defend itself” in any way it sees fit and referred
to Sharon as a “man of peace.” This characterisation shows
that Bush knows nothing of Sharon's bloody track record, and of his
determination to transform all of geographic Palestine into “Greater
Israel.” Bush has also placed Washington's traditional friends
in the region in a difficult position by snubbing Palestinian President
Yasser Arafat, blamed him for the rising cycle of violence although
Sharon is the man responsible and called for “regime change”
in Palestine at a time “regime change” would be more appropriate
in Israel.
Adding insult to injury, US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfield, a senior
administration hawk, has departed from longstanding US policy by calling
the West Bank and Gaza, captured by Israel in 1967, as “so-called
occupied territories.” He stated, “..there was a war. Israel
urged neighbouring countries not to get involved in it once it started.
They all jumped in they lost a lot of real estate to Israel because
Israel prevailed in the conflict.” Consequently, he refused to
call upon Israel to abandon its settlements in the conquered areas.
By these comments Rumsfeld revealed that he is as dangerously ignorant
as Bush junior.
Rumsfeld also attempted to mollify Saudi Arabia by saying that a Washington
Post report on a briefing alleging that Saudi Arabia is an “enemy”
of the US was “unfortunate.”
According to the Post, an expert from the Rand Corporation think tank
told the top Pentagon advisory board, “Saudi Arabia supports our
enemies and attacks our allies” and is the “kernel of evil,
the prime mover, the most dangerous opponent” of the US in the
region.
While the administration and Rand promptly distanced themselves from
these remarks, the Post quoted an official who said that “people
are recognising reality and recognising Saudi Arabia is a problem.”
A problem because Riyadh will not go along with Bush administration
policies.
However, Rumsfeld's observation that the view of the Rand expert “does
not represent “dominant opinion” in the administration cannot
but raise Arab concern. This view has, apparently, been adopted by Vice
President Dick Cheney, angered when the Saudis and other Arabs told
him the US should not go to war against Iraq during his highly publicised
tour of the region last spring.
One cannot underestimate the dangers posed by the ignorance or the ill
will exhibited by some members of this administration. Combined with
a unilateralist agenda and the power to carry it out, their ignorance
and ill will pose a very serious threat to the region and to the well-being
of the whole world.
3. - Associated Press - "Leader: Iraqi Kurds won't 'blindly' join U.S. front":
ANKARA / August 7, 2002
A key Iraqi opposition figure said Wednesday his group would not "blindly" commit to any U.S. plans to topple Saddam Hussein.
Jalal Talabani, leader of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan,
one of two Kurdish factions controlling northern Iraq, spoke during
a visit to Ankara. He was en route to Washington for meetings with U.S.
officials along with other opposition figures.
"We are not for blindly participating in any attack or in any plan,"
Talabani said after talks with Turkish Foreign Ministry officials. "We
are not in favor of having a new dictatorship replacing the old one."
Iraqi Kurds control an autonomous zone in northern Iraq that could become
a key base if U.S. forces try to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Kurds enjoy a large degree of freedom in the autonomous areas and are
concerned about what type of government would replace Saddam and if
the Kurds would continue to enjoy autonomy.
Kurds rose up against Saddam after the 1991 Gulf War, a rebellion that
was suppressed by Iraqi forces. Many Kurds had been looking to the United
States for support during that rebellion and are extremely hesitant
to consider joining any U.S.-led alliance.
Earlier, Talabani told private NTV television he was confident that
the Iraqi opposition could unite against Saddam.
"There is a high possibility of unifying the opposition,"
NTV quoted Talabani as saying. "I think a new front will emerge."
Talabani was scheduled to meet with military officials to discuss the
prospects of U.S.-led military action against Iraq.
Turkey is extremely wary of any cooperation with the Iraqi Kurds. It
fears they could set up an independent state that might encourage Turkey's
own restive Kurdish minority.
Turkey was a staging point for attacks against Iraq during the 1991
Gulf War and would also be key to any future coalition.
4. - Financial Ttimes - "Dervis paves way for Turkish alliance":
By Semih Idiz in Ankara and Quentin Peel in London
August 06, 2002
Kemal Dervis, Turkey's embattled economy minister and architect of the
country's economic stabilisation programme, on Tuesday spelt out what
sounded like an election platform for the next Turkish government, in
an apparent bid to unite the divided parties of the centre and centre-left.
Addressing local businessmen in the central Anatolian city of Eskisehir,
Mr Dervis talked about the need for the elections in November to produce
a "strong government with a unified vision" that would administer
the country along rational lines, and attract new foreign investment.
His speech followed an ultimatum from Bulent Ecevit, the prime minister,
for him to decide if he still supports the ruling coalition. The defection
of many members has forced the government to call an early poll.
Mr Dervis's political statement and public attempts to bring together
a liberal-leftwing alliance to run in the elections have angered the
premier.
But Mr Dervis is seen in the financial markets as the one person guaranteeing
implementation of economic reforms backed by a $16.3bn package of loans
from the International Monetary Fund.
The next $1.1bn tranche is due to be approved by the IMF on Wednesday.
Repeating that he was a social democrat, the economy minister said on
Tuesday that Turkey must reform its system of government. He said that
a coalition where the partners represented radically different political
views could only serve to preserve special interests.
In an earlier interview with the Financial Times, Mr Dervis called for
the country's three social democratic parties to unite behind a common
platform and a common candidate for prime minister.
He ruled out running for prime minister himself, insisting that his
job was to manage the economy.
At the same time he praised the package of human rights reforms approved
by the outgoing Turkish parliament at the weekend, saying that it "virtually
fulfils the Copenhagen criteria" laid down by the European Union
as the prerequisite for membership of the EU.
"There is a huge mobilisation in favour of Europe," he said.
"Now Turkey's expectations from Europe are for a very decisive
step forward."
Mr Dervis said that with the latest reform package, "it is very
hard to argue that [membership] negotiations cannot start".
As for his own political plans, he said that he supported Ismail Cem,
the former foreign minister, who quit the government to launch the New
Turkey party in July.
"We will move together," Mr Dervis said. "But at this
point I would like to try to convince all my colleagues that it would
be better to join forces."
5. - Turkish Daily News - "ANALYSIS - Military stands firm in mire of Turkish politics":
Turkish Army's persistent influence in civilian life
is at odds with Turkey's stated aim of joining the EU, a goal publicly
embraced by the generals. Prof. Yayla said the army would play a crucial
role in the coming months both in domestic politics and on the international
stage.
"It wouldn't really make so much difference who is in charge (of
the military) if AK Party is the winner," said Professor Hasan
Unal of Bilkent University. Unal predicted Ozkok would be as tough on
AKP as his predecessors were on Necmettin Erbakan, whose government
was forced from power in 1997.
August 08, 2002 / by Claudia Parsons
In the unpredictable world of Turkish politics, there is one player
that stands firm, lending a guiding hand and guaranteeing the principles
of the secular state it vows to defend at all costs.
The military has carried out three coups since 1960 and
as recently as 1997 forced an Islamist-led government out of power on
the grounds that it threatened to overturn Muslim Turkey's fierce brand
of secularism.
"We don't have a government. The prime minister is sick, everybody
is looking forward to elections. The only establishment we have is the
army," said Atilla Yayla, professor of political science at Hacettepe
University.
Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit fought a losing battle last month to avert
early elections, now set for November 3.
For several months his three-party coalition had been crumbling, divisions
deepening over joining the European Union. Ecevit fell ill at the start
of May and was away from his desk for nearly two months.
The army sees itself as the guardian of Turkey's secular democracy,
and has always handed back power after its coups. Surveys show it is
the most trusted institution in Turkey.
But the army's persistent influence in civilian life is at odds with
Turkey's stated aim of joining the EU, a goal publicly embraced by the
generals.
Yayla said the army would play a crucial role in the coming months both
in domestic politics and on the international stage.
Turkey's election comes at a time of growing speculation that Washington
is preparing military action in Iraq to topple President Saddam Hussein.
The United States is expected to lean heavily on its NATO-ally Turkey
for support in the operation.
"The army will decide what to do in all these issues, which is
good for the United States," Yayla said, adding that the military
would prefer to be involved in any U.S. action but would drive a hard
bargain to protect Turkey's interests.
Turkey fears war in Iraq would damage its already fragile economy, recovering
from a deep crisis last year, and could lead to the creation of a Kurdish
state in northern Iraq that Ankara fears would encourage separatism
among its own restive Kurds.
Ankara, led by the generals, will be seeking concrete guarantees before
it commits itself to help in an attack.
Divided Cyprus
The attitude of the military will also be crucial in another
foreign policy conundrum -- finding a solution on the divided island
of Cyprus where peace talks underway since January have made little
progress so far.
Peace talks have been given added urgency by the fact that Cyprus is
close to finalising membership of the EU, expected to happen in 2004
or 2005. Ankara has threatened to annex the north if Cyprus is admitted
without a solution, creating the potential for a major crisis in Turkey's
relations with the EU.
Turkey's newly appointed chief of general staff, General Hilmi Ozkok,
has plenty of experience on Cyprus. As head of Turkey's land forces
until his promotion this weekend, he has visited the island frequently
and has made clear his firm support for Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf
Denktas's hard line.
On a visit to Cyprus in January, Ozkok said a solution based on two
sovereign states was the only way to prevent a crisis in the region.
Such an idea is anathema to Greek Cypriots. Ozkok warned of problems
if the EU accepts Cyprus without a solution.
"We think that such a development will cause a continuous crisis
atmosphere in the east Mediterranean," he said.
AK Party viewed with suspicion
On the domestic side too there are some who warn of looming
crisis. The Justice and Development Party, AKP, formed from the ashes
of an Islamist party banned last year, has topped most opinion polls
in recent months.
Western diplomats, however, say AKP leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan has
made efforts to move away from his Islamist roots and on policy he now
resembles other conservative parties.
Military analyst Mehmet Ali Kislali said the generals would be unlikely
to act hastily even if AKP were to come to power.
"Of course they would be worried and they would follow developments
very carefully, and if they think the basic principles of the republic
are in danger, they may (do something)," Kislali said.
"Nobody should make a wrong calculation," Kislali said. "I'm
sure Erdogan...learned a lot in the last few years so I don't expect
they would make the same stupid mistakes of Erbakan."
6. - AFP - "Turkish labor minister resigns in row over workers' rights"
ANKARA / August 07, 2002
Turkey's Labor Minister Yasar Okuyan has resigned amid
controversy over a bill aiming to expand the rights of workers in line
with European Union standards, deputy Prime Minister Sukru Sina Gurel
said Wednesday.
Announcing Okuyan's resignation on NTV television, Gurel defended the
legislation intended to make it more difficult for employers to sack
workers.
Although a member of the pro-business Motherland Party, junior partner
in Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit's three-party government, Okuyan was
in favor of the bill.
The row adds to the woes of the shaky coalition at a time when it is
heading towards early elections in November in the wake of a severe
government crisis.
Business groups had earlier put strong pressure on the government to
stop the legislation, expected to be debated in parliament on Thursday,
on the grounds that it would increase their difficulties at a time when
a severe economic crisis was already plaguing them.
"This is a new arrangement to come closer to EU and International
Labor Organization (ILO) criteria" in the labor field, said Gurel,
who is also Turkey's Foreign Minister.
"It is high time for us to align with EU norms in this field as
well, and not only with the EU's political criteria," he said,
referring to sweeping democracy reforms passed by parliament last week.
The bill enables sacked workers to sue employers and obliges employers
to prove that the sacking is not in breach of contract terms.
If the court rules in favor of the plaintiff, the employer is obliged
to either take the employee back or pay compensation amounting to at
least six months' wages.
The bill also says that union activities by workers, pregnancy, gender,
political convictions, ethnic and religious background cannot constitute
a reason for ending work contracts. It also makes mass lay-offs more
difficult.
Turkey's biggest confederation of unions, Turk-Is, denounced efforts
by the business comunity to impede the reform.
"This bill brings no financial burden for employers, not even a
penny," Turk-Is head Bayram Meral told reporters.
"We expect the parliament to pass this bill and we expect employer
circles to give up their pressure against it," he added.