18 September 2002

1. "Turkey says it deserves EU talks date", Turkey said Wednesday it had done its homework in meeting European Union's criteria for opening talks and urged the 15-nation bloc to set a date for the start of negotiations to become a member.

2. "Turkey's pro-Islamic ex-premier barred from running for parliament", a local electoral board on Tuesday rejected former pro-Islamic Premier Necmettin Erbakan's application to run for parliament in the Nov. 3 elections in this officially secular country.

3. "EU May Omit Cyprus from Enlargement List", the EU may omit Cyprus next month from a keenly awaited list of candidate states deemed ready to close accession talks in December for fear of upsetting delicate peace negotiations, diplomats said on Tuesday.

4. "Costs of Imperial Adventurism", by Geov Parrish, WorkingForChange.com.

5. "US grants Turkey 200 million US dollars", the United States will provide 200 million US dollars in grants to Turkey under an agreement signed in Ankara on Tuesday.

6. "Özkök a predator of press freedom", the head of Turkey's armed forces belongs to the National Security Council, an advisory body in charge of administering the state of emergency in the south-eastern province of Anatolia.

1. - AFP - "Turkey says it deserves EU talks date":

ANKARA / 18 September 2002

Turkey said Wednesday it had done its homework in meeting European Union's criteria for opening talks and urged the 15-nation bloc to set a date for the start of negotiations to become a member.

"We have fulfilled our obligations and we expect the European Union to fulfill its obligations," Turkish foreign ministry deputy spokesman Huseyin Dirioz told a news conference here. "We have been conveying our expectations to our European interlocutors regularly," he added. His remarks came a day after a senior EU official expressed doubt that Ankara would be granted a date for the opening of talks for its entry into the pan-European bloc any time soon.

"We have not yet drawn definitive conclusions but it is probable that we shall not propose a date for the opening of negotiations" with Turkey, Eneko Landaburu, the commission's director general for enlargement, said in Brussels late Tuesday. In a bid to strengthen its long-standing bid to join the European Union, Turkey adopted last month a set of human rights reforms which included one-time taboos such as the abolition of the death penalty and greater cultural rights for its Kurdish minority. Since then, Ankara has been pressing Brussels to set a date for accession talks at its Copenhagen summit when the Union is to draw up its enlargement plans.

Supporters fear that Turkey, the laggard among 13 membership hopefuls, will see its EU bid postponed indefinitely if it fails to obtain a date for the start of accession talks by the end of the year. But the European Union has made it clear that the reforms were not a guarantee for formal accession talks and said it will closely monitor their implementation. Many in Turkey doubt the EU will give Ankara a green light without a resolution to the long-standing conflict over Cyprus, a ront-runner to join the EU. Cyprus has been divided since Turkey invaded its northern part in 1974. Another major obstacle is seen as the army's role in politics. The powerful military dominates the country's top decision-making body, the National Security Council, and forced the country's first Islamist prime minister to resign in 1997.

2. - Assocoated Press - "Turkey's pro-Islamic ex-premier barred from running for parliament":

ANKARA / 17 September 2002

A local electoral board on Tuesday rejected former pro-Islamic Premier Necmettin Erbakan's application to run for parliament in the Nov. 3 elections in this officially secular country.

Erbakan, 75, who led Turkey's Islamic movement for three decades, was banned from politics for five years in 1998 after a court closed his Welfare Party for violating this mainly Muslim country's secular laws. The ban expires in 2003.

Erbakan insisted the ruling only prohibits him from joining political parties and applied to run as an independent in the central Turkish city of Konya, a traditional stronghold of pro-Islamic parties.

But Nuri Kaya, the head of the electoral board for Konya, said a panel of three judges voted unanimously against Erbakan, the Anatolia news agency reported.

The ruling is a strong indication that Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the popular leader of an Islamic-oriented party that is tipped to emerge the largest in the November polls, could also be barred from running. An Ankara-based board is expected to rule in the coming days as to whether Erdogan's 1999 conviction on charges of inciting religious hatred also disqualifies him as a candidate.

"We decided that (Erbakan) is not eligible to run for parliament," the agency quoted Kaya as telling reporters at the end of a three hour meeting.

Erbakan's lawyer, Veli Tolu, told Anatolia the ex-premier would appeal the decision.

Erbakan led a pro-Islamic government in 1996 but was pressured out of power the following year by the staunchly-secular military.

Despite the political ban, Erbakan wields influence over another Islamic party led by his former lawmakers.

Erbakan was convicted of fraud earlier this year_ a conviction that could ban him from politics for life under Turkish law. Erbakan was accused of falsifying party records to hide millions of dollars in cash that were ordered seized after his party was disbanded. Erbakan denies the charges and an appeal is pending.

3. - Riyadh Daily / Reuters - "EU May Omit Cyprus from Enlargement List":

BRUSSELS / 18 September 2002

The EU may omit Cyprus next month from a keenly awaited list of candidate states deemed ready to close accession talks in December for fear of upsetting delicate peace negotiations, diplomats said on Tuesday. European Union leaders are due to approve the list of up to 10 countries when they meet in Brussels on October 24-25. The countries named would finally join the wealthy bloc in 2004. Though the internationally recognized Greek Cypriot government is well on track in preparing its economy and laws for EU entry, it is also locked in UN-mediated talks with the breakaway Turkish Cypriot statelet in the north of the island. "We have to ask whether it is wise at this juncture to state clearly that Cyprus will be in the next wave (of enlargement)," said one EU diplomat, referring both to the peace negotiations and also to elections in Turkey due on November 3.

"We don’t want to do anything to create turbulence in Turkey on the eve of their election...The timing (of the Brussels summit) would argue in favor of less specific language on Cyprus," the diplomat said. "It would surely be wise to remove any pressure on the two sides (the Greek and Turkish Cypriots) as they seek a solution." Turkey, itself a candidate country, has often accused the EU of being biased in favor of the Greek Cypriot majority on the island and has warned Brussels against admitting Cyprus without a political settlement between the two communities. The EU says it wants a settlement but is ready to admit only the internationally recognized Greek Cypriot part if necessary. "It is unlikely that we will see any progress in the peace talks before the Turkish election on November 3," the EU diplomat said.

The diplomat said the EU member states and the European Commission were in close contact on this issue, but added that no decision had yet been made on the exact language to be used. EU diplomats would certainly have to come up with a very carefully worded formula to avoid upsetting Cyprus and its EU patron, Greece, which has threatened to veto the Union’s wider enlargement into eastern Europe if Cyprus is not part of it. "The wording would have to be very cautious on Cyprus and also take into account the very real progress Cyprus has made in its accession talks," one Greek diplomat said. "But of course we cannot prejudge the outcome of the United Nations’ talks," he added.

The first diplomat said the EU leaders’ meeting in Brussels would probably invoke the language used at a summit in Helsinki in 1999 when Turkey achieved EU candidate status. At Helsinki, the EU heads of state and government said they would "take account of all relevant factors" when the time came to decide whether to admit a divided Cyprus into the Union. The 10 countries hoping to join the EU in the next wave of expansion are Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. Two others, Bulgaria and Romania, hope to join later in the decade. Turkey, the 13th candidate, has yet to begin accession talks due to concerns over its human rights record. Ankara hopes the EU leaders will name a date at their summit in Copenhagen for the start of its accession negotiations.

4. - AlterNet.org - "Costs of Imperial Adventurism":

17 September 2002 / by Geov Parrish, WorkingForChange.com

Tuesday's news that Iraq would accept unconditional U.N. weapons inspections is, potentially, a welcome breakthrough -- until one remembers that Dick Cheney and other White House officials have pledged a U.S. inspection of Iraq regardless of what Baghdad says or offers regarding inspections or anything else. The Bush team wants Saddam out, and they want control of Iraq's oil -- period.

More importantly, support of the world's governments -- especially U.S. allies and other world powers on the U.N. Security Council -- also may not have much to do with what Iraq says or offers. A more telling headline came Monday, when a Saudi official hinted on CNN that his country might consider allowing the U.S. military to use Saudi bases as a staging area for an Iraq invasion, should the United Nations approve the war.

That would be a reversal from previous Saudi statements, and while it was more conditional than coverage here made it sound, soon enough, it won't be. Look for more reversals in the coming weeks -- lots of them. And the sudden decisions by critical governments to sign off on the Dubya Jihad will have nothing to do with either offers or the actual behavior of Iraq. Nor will these reversals relate to any actual threat Baghdad may or may not pose to its neighbors -- let alone the United States -- let alone the future of civilization.

Instead, global approval of an Iraq "regime change" will have everything to do with perceived national self-interest, as the world's governments exact as many concessions and bribes as possible from a White House desperate to fight a war and desperate to tell the American public that the world agrees.

The fire sale is on, just as it was with George W. Bush's father in the six-month runup to the Gulf War in late 1990. This time, prices are higher, owing to international public opposition to an American invasion, the recklessness and bellicosity of Bush's statements to date, his poor history of international cooperation (worse than usual for a country that never, ever plays by the world's rules), and the noticeable lack of any actual threat. That doesn't mean Bush won't get his way; it just drives up the price.

This is a war America wants, which is the only reason we're even talking about it now. But since America wants it, badly, and since the United States needs both nearby military bases and the fig leaf of international cooperation to justify its aggression, George W. Bush -- like his father -- is willing to pay a great deal of money and call in a great many favors to line up "support." Let the auction begin.

Just about every other major country in the world has declared its public opposition to Bush's plans. And every single one of them has its price. In coming weeks, one by one, various countries will announce their support for America's war -- and we, the American people, the true audience for this charade, will be constantly reminded of it. And then Dubya can have his war. All it will cost is a few hundred thousand (or more) Iraqi lives, probably a new, brutal Iraqi regime every bit as authoritarian as the present one, an environmental catastrophe, an enormous wave of worldwide anti-American hatred (and terrorism), destabilization of the Middle East (and a lot more weapons flooding an already volatile region), and lots and lots and lots of money.

The cost of a war against Iraq and then a subsequent occupation -- even if the war is quick and "efficient" -- will be huge; the mobilization alone is already adding a significant amount to a hemorrhaging federal deficit that didn't exist a year ago. The cost of this war isn't getting much attention, but when (and if) it is totaled, the cost beforehand of bribing the rest of the world into supporting our imperial adventurism won't be counted. It will be a lot.

Here's a partial look at the shopping lists being dutifully relayed to Colin Powell and the American delegation at the U.N.:

Britain: Free. Tony Blair always comes cheap.

France: Wants a cut of the Iraqi oil fields. Last time, the French got largely frozen out of Kuwait, and Paris has been one of the most notable countries agitating for (and quietly purchasing) Iraqi oil over the past few years despite economic sanctions. Once Iraq's massive oil deposits are taken out of Baghdad's hands once and for all -- you didn't seriously think that this war was being waged because the most oil-crazed White House in American history cared a whit about weapons of mass destruction, did you? -- France will want guaranteed access and partial control in order to not use its U.N. Security Council veto.

France, Germany, and other EU allies are also wanting American concessions on a number of the festering trade issues that have divided the EU and the U.S. in recent years. In this manner, displacing Saddam could directly affect seemingly unrelated matters like farm subsidies and steel tariffs. It might even preserve Europeans' right not to eat genetically modified burgers.

Russia: Another opponent of the invasion, Russia also has a Security Council veto. And we can't bribe them by promising help (directly and via Georgia and other former Soviet Republics) for Putin's genocidal war against the Chechens -- we already did that, in exchange for Russian backing of our Afghanistan adventure. Iraq doesn't share a border with Russia, but it's nearby and destabilization (and American map-drawing) worries Moscow deeply. The Russians will want more money, of course -- not just from the U.S. and the IMF and World Bank, but guarantees that the $8 billion debt Saddam Hussein owes them will be paid. Additional quiet investment in Caspian oil by American oil companies, lubricated by the State Department, will also help.

China: Like Moscow, Beijing has no real philosophical quarrel with bloody unilateral invasions; heck, it's what all big countries do. Beijing would like to eliminate those annoying Muslim separatists in western Xinjiang province, and to that end, the Bush Administration last week quietly added two of Beijing's problem groups to the official U.S. list of "terrorist" organizations. That makes China eligible for military and financial assistance in the war on terror. (One person's freedom fighter, another's terrorist.) More importantly, though, when Dubya came into power his crew reversed the last decade's American rapprochement with the People's Republic at the expense of Taiwan. Bush has cozied up to Taiwan instead. Beijing wants the White House to cut its new ties to Taiwan; if it does, China won't veto Bush's war when, not if, it comes before the Security Council.

Turkey: Along with Saudi Arabia, this is the country whose land and bases would be most essential to an American ground war. Turkey has a big, big problem, and it's called Kurdistan -- the largest unrecognized nation in the world, straddling Iraq, Turkey, and parts of Iran and Syria. All that rhetoric about Saddam's persecution of the Kurds being the reason he's so evil and must be removed doesn't sit well in Ankara, because our NATO ally has a record with its Kurdish minority that's just as abominably bloody; thousands of Kurdish political prisoners (terrorists, freedom fighters, whatever) now rot in Turkey's jails. Turkey wants assurances the de facto independent Kurdistan that's existed in the northern third of Iraq for the last decade will disappear. Completely. And it wants its Kurdish separatists called terrorists, too, with guarantees the Americans won't object to whatever tactics Turkey's military regime decide to use. How the White House will be able to finesse calling the Kurds terrorists on one side of a random colonial border, and freedom fighters on the other side, will be one of the keys to a successful auction.

Saudi Arabia: The most important of the Muslim states in the Middle East and North Africa in terms of nearby military bases, oil reserves, money, and a resentful underclass -- not to mention its status as the Muslim holy land, where the presence of U.S. troops will be seen as a further desecration and outrage. The issues facing Bush in bringing the Saudis on board are also issues with almost every other Islamic country. The reason most of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia is that its brutal regime has for years allowed no outlet other than religion for the political frustrations of the vast majority of people frozen out of the royal family's oil-and-nepotism wealth. And now the Saudis are terrified that an American invasion of Iraq will give its fundamentalist dissidents the public support that just might topple the regime.

Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, every Gulf state, and a host of other countries share to greater or lesser degrees the same concerns. They're all "moderate" regimes that use American money and weapons to steal from their country and keep the rabble in check, and they all want assurances that the U.S. will help, directly or indirectly, if they need assistance keeping a lid on the home front. This is why an invasion of Iraq has the frightening potential to become a massive regional war, a war of governments against citizens. White House commitments to weigh in should any of these regimes be seriously threatened are undoubtedly being made as part of the auction. In Saudi Arabia's case, the royals also want guarantees that Iraqi oil will not undercut their ability to be a swing producer and help determine world oil prices. (Not to worry. It's our oil; they just get a cut.)

Beyond these considerations, of course, there's the usual currency of such high-level bribery: money, weapons, more money, weapons, and cash. It's impossible to guess how much this diplomatic effort will cost taxpayers whether it succeeds or not, as much of it is being and will be funneled quietly through back channels. But it's already happening; the only questions are the final price tags and how much diplomatic support the Bush Administration feels it needs. If rhetoric is any guide, the answer is "not much"; a U.N. Security Council resolution and a nearby country offering its bases would probably do it.

That's almost certain to happen, meaning that the only thing that can stop a U.S. invasion of Iraq is if Washington decides not to do it. That could happen only if the White House is swayed by considerations of global public opinion, domestic public opinion, and/or domestic political opposition.

The latter is the most dangerous to the White House, and so we, the public, have been set up: we know at this point that Bush and his team have held off in order to allow for global opinion to weigh in, and the auction is quietly lining up a series of announcements whereby we'll be assured that the world is now on our side (buttressed by a U.N. resolution, and doubtless by some or another real or imagined Iraqi outrage -- Saddam is dumb enough to provide one, but if not, one can be manufactured). Almost all of the public doubts voiced in this country by political elites have hinged on the Bush team's threatened unilateralism; with that taken care of, the debate can end and the invasion can begin.

That's the White House plan over the next few months -- not as quick an invasion as it would have liked, perhaps, but calculated to effectively undercut most political anti-war opposition. We taxpayers are paying for it, in the form of promises and paychecks to all those currently opposed governments around the world; it's the one, perhaps the only, form of foreign aid the Bush Administration seems positively enthusiastic about. Just remember, when those pledges of foreign support hit the news: there's more going on than meets the eye. It will have nothing to do with Iraq's behavior, and everything to do with bribery and divvying up the spoils of a conquered Iraq.

5. - Xinhua - "US grants Turkey 200 million US dollars"

18 September 2002

The United States will provide 200 million US dollars in grants to Turkey under an agreement signed in Ankara on Tuesday.

The agreement was signed by Turkish Treasury Undersecretary Faik Oztrak and US Ambassador to Turkey Robert Pearson in the presence of Turkish State Minister in charge of Economy Masum Turker.

Speaking at the ceremony, Turker said the grant is "extremely important" and an indication of the international support to his ongoing economic program backed by the International Monetary Fund.

The grant would be used in Turkey's foreign debt repayments in the 18-month period, Turker added.

On his part, Pearson said Turkey and the United States are allies in the global fight against terrorism, noting that "this is a noble effort. We are proud that we exert efforts with Turkey."

"This grant agreement is an expression of our gratefulness regarding the role which Turkey undertook in Afghanistan and in all aspects of fight against terrorism," Pearson added.

Commenting on the agreement, the Turkish mass-circulation newspaper Milliyet (National) noted that the grant is dubbed as " meaningful" in such a period when the preparations for an operation on Iraq are being speeded up and the pressure on Turkey to support the operation has increased.

6. - Reporters without Borders - "Özkök a predator of press freedom":

September 18, 2002

The head of Turkey's armed forces belongs to the National Security Council, an advisory body in charge of administering the state of emergency in the south-eastern province of Anatolia. The Council is a formidable instrument of media repression and stifling democratic debate and allows the army to constantly impose its views. More than a dozen newspapers were banned in the province in 2000. Journalists who challenge the army are routinely prosecuted and usually receive heavy sentences. Expression of certain opinions still carries a prison sentence in this country which has applied for membership of the European Union. Academic and editorialist Fikret Baskaya was jailed for 16 months in June 2001 for saying the government's handling of the Kurdish question was "racist and nationalist." Four other journalists are in jail for their opinions. The European Union has several times expressed concern at the army's role in Turkey.