Untitled Document

19 January 2004

1. "European Parliament Invites Jailed Kurdish Activist to Award Ceremony", the European Parliament, which has called for the release of former Kurdish deputy Leyla Zana, jailed in Turkey since 1994, on Friday invited her to attend an award ceremony in Brussels later this month.

2. "America appeases Ankara over Kurds", Washington reasserts political make-up to be determined by Iraqis, stresses that territorial integrity and unity are to be maintained

3. "Kurds in the new Iraq", history and geopolitics make the status of Kurds in Iraq an extremely contentious issue.

4. "U.S. must stop Turkey meddling in Iraq’s affairs", the protests in the city of Kirkuk have been the most significant events in Iraq since the U.S. occupation.

5. "Iran has extradited Kurdish insurgents to Turkey", in what has been regarded as a goodwill gesture, Iran has extradited Kurdish insurgents to Turkey.

6. "Turkey looks to shore up ties with Islamic neighbors", Turkey, a predominantly Muslim NATO ally, is aggressively pushing for closer ties with Iraq's neighbors Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia -- a diplomatic drive that could increase Turkey's strategic significance as a bridge between the Islamic world and the US.

7. "Back From Exile, Kurds Demand Political Power", for 130 Kurdish families just returned from exile, purgatory is a muddy field of green canvas tents propped up on this city's edge, the floors damp with rainwater, the interiors warmed by small kerosene heaters.

8. "Cyprus’ right to veto could pose problem for Turkey", Ankara must exert pressure for change on divided island to attain its EU goal.

1. - AFP - "European Parliament Invites Jailed Kurdish Activist to Award Ceremony":

ANKARA / 16 January 2004

The European Parliament, which has called for the release of former Kurdish deputy Leyla Zana, jailed in Turkey since 1994, on Friday invited her to attend an award ceremony in Brussels later this month.

Emma Nicholson, a senior European legislator, handed Zana's lawyer an invitation addressed to the jailed activist to attend a prize-giving ceremony in Brussels.

The move came at the start of the 10th hearing of her retrial by a state security court in Ankara.

Zana, who was herself bestowed an EU prize in 1995, and three other former Kurdish parliament members were imprisoned in 1994 for collaborating with the armed Kurdish rebellion.

They are now being retried in a case closely watched by the European Union, which Turkey is seeking to join.

"We believe she (Zana) should be released during this retrial, that she and her co-defendants should not be imprisoned during a retrial... This should be a complete retrial, not a rerun of an old trial," Nicholson, who was attending the court hearing Friday, told reporters.

"If she were released then she will be free to come to Brussels and receive her own Sakharov prize," she added.

European Commission President Romano Prodi, on a visit to Turkey, said Thursday the EU was closely following the retrial of Zana and her colleagues.

The court has rejected demands by the four defendants to be released on bail ever since their retrial started in March last year.

The four were able to ask for a judicial review under democratization reforms Ankara adopted in a bid to boost its candidacy for EU membership.

In 2001, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that their initial trial was unfair, because they were unable to have key witnesses questioned and were not informed in time when charges against them were modified.

The EU has strongly criticized the sentences as a move to silence even peaceful advocacy of Kurdish rights.

The defense has repeatedly complained during the retrial that the court is favoring the prosecution.

The four activists have also lodged a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights for being kept in prison during their retrial.

2. - AFP - "America appeases Ankara over Kurds":

Washington reasserts political make-up to be determined by Iraqis, stresses that territorial integrity and unity are to be maintained

WASHINGTON / 18 January 2004

The United States moved Friday to temper Turkey’s concerns about Iraqi Kurds forming an ethnic-based federation in post-war Iraq after a senior Turkish military official warned the creation of such an enclave would lead to bloodshed.

The State Department allowed that a decision on the political make-up of the country would be made by the Iraqis themselves, but stressed that Washington would not back down on its insistence that Iraq’s territorial integrity and political unity be maintained.

And, spokesman Richard Boucher noted that Kurdish members of the US-appointed interim Iraqi Governing Council shared that view. “We’ve always been quite clear that we support Iraq’s territorial integrity and political unity,” he said.

“The constitutional issues will be for Iraqis to decide but we would point out that the governing council does include Kurdish members who have expressed their own commitment to unified Iraq,” Boucher told reporters.

“The process of defining this state is taking place within the context of widespread agreement on a unified Iraq with territorial integrity,” he added. Earlier Friday in Ankara, the deputy chief of staff of the Turkish military, General Ilker Basbug, warned that “if a federation is established in Iraq, particularly a federation based on ethnic roots, the future of Iraq will be very difficult and very bloody.”

His remarks echoed earlier warnings by Ankara, which fears that the Iraqi Kurds, strong proponents of a federation, could expand their self-rule in northern Iraq, setting an example for their restive cousins in neighbouring Turkey.

Turkey has been urging the United States not to favour the Iraqi Kurds, their war-time ally, in the shaping of post-war Iraq and the matter is expected to top the agenda of a meeting later this month in Washington between Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and US President George W. Bush.

Basbug called on Washington to make good on its promises to take action against an estimated 5,000 rebels from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), an outlawed Turkish Kurd group, who found refuge in mountainous northern Iraq prior to the US invasion of the country.

Boucher said the United States continues to act against the PKK which it, along with Turkey, has designated the group a terrorist organization.

“We continue to work against the PKK to make sure they can’t find any haven in northern Iraq,” he said. “There is no place for the PKK in Iraq.”

3. - The Boston Globe - "Kurds in the new Iraq":

18 January 2004

HISTORY and geopolitics make the status of Kurds in Iraq an extremely contentious issue. To avoid conflicts within Iraq, the Bush administration must balance a historic obligation to seek justice for the Kurds against the cohesion of a democratic Iraq. A durable resolution of the Kurdish issue must be one that keeps neighbors with significant Kurdish populations -- Turkey, Iran, and Syria -- from intervening in Iraq and replicating the horror of Lebanon's many-sided civil war.

In recent days there have been public and private quarrels over Kurdish autonomy among America's top civilian administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, the leaders of the two principal Kurdish political parties, and members of the Iraqi Governing Council.

At the same time there has been a round of unusual three-way diplomatic activity involving the governments of Turkey, Iran, and Syria. On Jan. 4 Iran's foreign minister went to Damascus to discuss with Syrian officials what both regimes describe as Iraq's territorial integrity. The next day, Syria's President Bashar Assad made an unprecedented visit to Turkey to coordinate a common stand against any outcome in northern Iraq that might encourage Kurds in Syria or Turkey to seek their own autonomy or -- worst of all for Damascus and Ankara -- secession and independence.

Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan invoked a common stand against the specter of a separate Kurdish entity in northern Iraq when he declared Wednesday: "If Iraq moves toward disintegration, neighbors will get involved. Both Syria and Iran think the same way." This threat did not spell out what qualifies as disintegration or how the neighbors would get involved. But their paranoia at the prospect of Kurdish self-government in northern Iraq is clear enough.

Given this regional background, the Bush administration needs to understand a basic political principle and be able to explain it to America's Turkish ally as well as the unfriendly regimes in Tehran and Damascus. It is a principle that non-Kurdish Iraqis who have been grappling with the concept of a democratic federal state readily accept. They recognize that the reason to create a federal state with room for considerable regional autonomy is to keep the Kurds within a unified, sovereign Iraq -- that this is the surest way to prevent the fragmentation of Iraq.

4. - KurdishMedia.com - "U.S. must stop Turkey meddling in Iraq’s affairs":

18 January 2004 / by Rauf Naqishbendi

The protests in the city of Kirkuk have been the most significant events in Iraq since the U.S. occupation. The ramifications of this volatile situation will go far beyond marching in the streets if the U.S. does not use its considerable power to solve the problems underlying these protests. Kurds have been demonstrating to voice their desire to include

Kirkuk in the proposed autonomous Kurdish region in the anticipated federated Iraq. Pro-Saddam Arabs and Turkmens supported by Turkey oppose the proposal of including Kirkuk in the Kurdish region. If the U.S. continues to mishandle this situation it will develop into a fomentation of animosity, adding to the problematic stand of the U.S. in Iraq, escalating the current degree of chaos to more dangerous levels. Examining the underlying issues involved in the current situation in Kirkuk will help to avoid the realization of this undesirable possibility.

To begin, the most recent census was taken in 1957 when Iraq was a British colony. According to this census, Kurds were the majority population of Kirkuk. When the Ba’th party came to power in1963 , they began a program of forcing Kurds out of Kirkuk and the surrounding area and replacing them with Arab settlers. The program of Arabization in oil rich regions of Iraqi Kurdistan continued to intensify until1970 .

During the period spanning 1970 until1974 , the time of negotiations between the Kurdish Revolutionary forces and the Iraqi Regime, this practice slowed. After1974 , the program intensified again and by the1980 ’s the majority of Kurds had been driven out of their homeland and had migrated else where in Iraq. Thus, the Ba’th party had succeeded in altering the demographics in the most economically viable areas of Iraq.

The Kurds had been excluded from claiming their rights to benefit from the resources of their homeland. This campaign was not carried out in secret. The U.S. and the rest of the world knew what was happening and why. It was clear that the forced relocation of the Kurds was part of the genocide being committed against them by the Iraqi regime. The U.S. was then supporting the Iraqi government and lending aid to Saddam to help him win the war against Iran. So the U.S. turned a blind eye to the campaign for genocide of the Kurds. Sadly, in spite of the recent developments in Iraq, the policy of the U.S. regarding the treatment of the Kurds has not improved.

Decades passed since the Kurds were forced from their homelands. Now Saddam has been toppled and the Kurds have unconditionally allied themselves with the coalition forces. Their support was made manifest as they fought side-by-side the U.S. troops. The Kurds placed high hopes that the U.S. would champion the Kurds’ cause and make it a priority to remedy the wrongs of the campaign of genocide. But the war against Saddam has ended and so far the U.S. has taken no positive steps to address the atrocities committed against the Kurds. Adding to the insult of this situation is the way U.S. occupation stands to maintain the status quo planned and executed by Saddam’s regime. It is easy to see the reality of these dehumanizing demographic changes.

A prime example is Mosul, a city located in the heart of Iraqi Kurdistan. Within the boundaries of this historically Kurdish city, Kurds are now a minority. They have been pushed out to the provinces, where they are still the majority. This situation mirrors that of Kirkuk. There has to be an explanation for this. Aliens did not abduct the Kurdish inhabitants of these cities and then replaced them with Arabs. It is obvious to all concerned that Saddam’s regime forced the Kurds out. It is also just as obvious that the U.S. continues to ignore the situation. This is a serious cause for concern.

The U.S. is a tall standing power in Iraq making claims to bring justice to the Iraqi people. If this claim is true, then why does the U.S. have such a hard time accepting the need for justice for the Kurds? To answer this question one must examine the U.S.’s record of betraying the Kurds and its record of siding with evil regimes in the Middle East. The U.S. has sided with Saddam, the Former Shah of Iran, and Turkey, all of which have committed human rights abuses against the Kurds.

Turkey has been instrumental in igniting chaos in Kirkuk by using its influence on the Turkmen’s population in that area. It is obvious that Turkey is doing everything it can to prevent Kurds from obtaining freedom and justice. The Turks argue that if the Kurds in Iraq were granted what they demand, then the fifteen million oppressed Kurds in Turkey would demand the same. First, it should be noted that the Kurds in Turkey are already advocating for justice and freedom. Secondly, what does the situation with Kurds in Iraq have to do with Kurds in Turkey? How did Turkey get a voice in deciding political policy in Iraq?

The U.S. will have many more difficulties to face if Turkey does not stop fueling instability in Iraq. (Much of that fuel comes in the form of U.S. dollars.) It is time for the U.S. to insist that Turkey stop meddling in the political affairs of the Iraqi people.

The neglect in addressing the problems of the dislocated Kurds and the confiscation of their property is already making Kurds nervous about the U.S.’s intentions toward their demand for justice. The U.S.’s silence and indifference in this matter is a sign of ill intentions. This is causing Kurdish frustrations to brew and if the U.S. does not act soon, it will lose the only true friend it has in the region.

The only way to paint a positive picture of the U.S. occupation of Iraq is if it creates peace and stability in Kurdistan. The current chaos will develop into a catastrophic situation for the Iraqi people and the coalition forces if the U. S. does not address the Kurds the necessity for Kurdish national recognition and the rights of dislocated Kurds to return to their birthplace. After all, the Kurds are only demanding what is their birth right as human beings and that should not be too difficult to understand.

When all is said and done, the U.S. should recognize that the Kurds have a vested interest in peace and stability in Iraq, whereas, the Turks have a vested interest in creating chaos. The U.S. should act upon the good intentions of the Kurds and stand firm for their human rights. The time is now for the U.S. to speak to the dictatorial Turks in a new language, one that denounces their false and unfounded territorial claim in Iraq, instead of speaking in the language of multi-billion dollar endorsement checks.

5. - Middle East Newsline - "Iran has extradited Kurdish insurgents to Turkey":

ANKARA / 18 January 2004

In what has been regarded as a goodwill gesture, Iran has extradited Kurdish insurgents to Turkey.

Turkish security sources said Iran has sent two detained members of the Kurdish Workers Party to Turkey. The two were wanted insurgents who had sought refuge in Iran.

The Iranian decision was said to have come as a result of years of pressure by Turkey for security cooperation regarding the PKK. Iran has been harboring more than 1,000 PKK and other Turkish fugitives over the last five years.

The sources said they did not know whether Iran would extradite additional PKK members to Turkey. They said so far Syria, another Turkish neighbor and Iran's leading ally, has extradited 39 fugitive insurgents to Turkey over the last few months.

6. - Associated Press - "Turkey looks to shore up ties with Islamic neighbors":

ISTANBUL / 19 January 2004

Turkey, a predominantly Muslim NATO ally, is aggressively pushing for closer ties with Iraq's neighbors Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia -- a diplomatic drive that could increase Turkey's strategic significance as a bridge between the Islamic world and the US.

Turkey's government this month held high level talks with both Syria and Iran, countries that the US has accused of terrorism. On Saturday, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan headed to Saudi Arabia for an economic forum with regional leaders and later in the month he will meet US President George W. Bush in Washington.

The diplomatic traffic comes as Turkey tries to mobilize countries in the region to oppose Iraqi Kurds' plans for a federation that would include a self-governing Kurdish zone in the north. Many countries in the region fear that could lead to Iraqi Kurdish independence and destabilize the region.

"We have said that a federation based on ethnic lines wouldn't be right," Erdogan told reporters Saturday before departing for Saudi Arabia. "We share this concern with neighboring countries."

Analysts say Turkey's warming ties with the Middle East could bring the country closer to Washington, where US officials, including Bush, have spoken of Turkey as a model of a secular democracy in the region.

"Iraq is becoming a unifying factor in the region," said columnist Somi Kohen of the daily Milliyet. "Turkish diplomacy is trying to mobilize public opinion in the region now. This gives Turkey the opportunity to play the role of a regional power."

Many countries in the region have long been suspicious of Turkey because of its close ties with the US and Israel. The Islamic-rooted governing party is aggressively promoting Turkey's bid to join the EU, but apparently wants to keep its options open if the EU snubs Turkey at a crucial summit at the end of the year.

Turkey's regional ties have been boosted ever since parliament refused last March to allow US troops in the country ahead of the Iraq invasion. The March decision upset relations with Washington but was hailed by many countries in the region, where -- like in Turkey -- there was strong opposition to the war.

"Regional countries perceived what Turkey did as standing up to the US," said Soner Cagaptay, an analyst with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

But now Turkey's government is eager to restore relations with the US as it seeks influence in Iraq, particularly as Iraqi Kurds push for greater self-rule. Turkey fears a repeat of fighting with Kurdish rebels who fought for autonomy in southeastern Turkey.

In an effort to improve relations with Washington, Turkey agreed after the war to open its air bases to the US-led coalition for logistical support. It even offered to send peacekeepers to Iraq, an offer that was shelved because of strong Iraqi opposition to the deployment.

Turkey will allow more than 100,000 US troops to pass through a southern air base in the coming months in a major rotation of US troops -- a move unforeseeable last March.

7. - The New York Times - "Back From Exile, Kurds Demand Political Power":

KIRKUK / 19 January 2004 / by Edward Wong

For 130 Kurdish families just returned from exile, purgatory is a muddy field of green canvas tents propped up on this city's edge, the floors damp with rainwater, the interiors warmed by small kerosene heaters.

It is not the homecoming they expected. Driven from Kirkuk more than a decade ago by Saddam Hussein's government, they eke out their days waiting for what they say is their due.

"We lost years of our lives, so we need compensation," Lukman Abdul-Rahman, 39, said as he stood surrounded by a dozen men, all nodding vigorously. "The Kurds have suffered much more than others, and we should be the government's top priority."

Kurdish demands for political rights and reparations have suddenly emerged as one of the most pressing issues confronting American officials, who are trying to create an Iraqi transitional government. Kirkuk, an oil-rich city just outside the northern Kurdish region, is the linchpin of the Kurds' drive to retain their autonomy.

In Kirkuk, the campaign by Kurdish leaders for broad governing powers and claims by families for property restoration are feeding ethnic tensions that could explode. That prospect seems even more likely if Kirkuk's political future is put to a vote in the area, an idea that Kurdish leaders and some members of the Iraqi Governing Council are now supporting.

Recent protests by Arab and Turkmen residents against such Kurdish claims have already ended in gunfire and death. American soldiers have stepped up street patrols, and their searches of the headquarters of various political parties have uncovered illegal weapons. A bomb exploded near the headquarters of one of the two main Kurdish parties on Jan. 11.

Thousands of Kurdish and a few Turkmen families have flooded the city to demand land stripped from them under Mr. Hussein. Many live in squalor, some in tent villages, others in ramshackle public buildings. Arabs paid to move here under the former government's campaign to make the region Arab fear that Kurds will exact vengeance, and many have fled.

For the two main Kurdish parties, this change in demographics bolsters their claim that the Kurdish autonomous region should envelop Kirkuk.

Kurdish leaders believe they need the oil fields and rich agricultural land nearby to keep the Kurdish region economically independent. But no political group is willing to cede control of Kirkuk to the Kurds.

The Americans are trying to control the situation, said Joost R. Hiltermann, a Middle East expert with the International Crisis Group, a conflict prevention organization, but "it could really get out of hand."

Mr. Hiltermann said: "The Kurds have to make a basic decision — to go with the Americans or not. If they go with the Americans, they'll get support, but not everything they want, namely Kirkuk."

L. Paul Bremer III, the top American administrator in Iraq, has met twice recently with Kurdish leaders to ask them to back down from their demands, including from their claims to Kirkuk, only to be rebuffed.

Fatal clashes have flared up, with Arabs, Kurds and Turkmens each claiming the city as their own.

"The ambition of the Kurds is not a new ambition," said Esmail al-Hadidi, a deputy mayor of Kirkuk and a member of one of the city's oldest Arab families. "But we need Kirkuk for everyone. The Arabs here are not willing to let Kirkuk go to the Turkmen and the Kurds."

At a nearby youth and sports center for Turkmens, a banner proclaims that "Kirkuk is a Turkmen city and will stay a Turkmen city forever." Powder-blue flags with a crescent moon and stars, similar to the Turkish flag, are displayed inside. Muhammad Arga Oglo, 30, the director of the Turkmen Student and Youth Union, greeted a visitor while sitting beneath a poster of Ottoman horsemen slaughtering their enemies in a river of blood.

"We have the right to express ourselves by any means," he said. "If it's necessary to defend ourselves, we will."

Thousands of Arabs and Turkmens held a rally at the end of December against the Kurdish demand for autonomy, and it ended in gunfire between protesters and Kurdish guerrilla fighters. Four protesters were killed and 24 wounded; other killings have followed.

Officers with the 173rd Airborne Brigade, which controls the city, have asked leaders of the main ethnic groups to stop the violence. But during a sweep of the offices of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, American soldiers found a cache of weapons that included 17 Kalashnikov rifles and three rocket-propelled grenade launchers, said Maj. Douglas Vincent, a spokesman for the American-led forces. Major Vincent said soldiers also found Kalashnikovs at the headquarters of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, the other main Kurdish party, and at the Iraqi Turkmen Front.

Najat Hassan, the local head of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, denied that American soldiers had found illegal weapons. He also defended what he called the right of Kurds to govern the city. "Kirkuk is a historical and geographical part of the Kurdish region," he said.

Mr. Hassan explained his own claim, dating back a half-century, to a one-story home in the city center. In 1986, he said, Mr. Hussein's government seized his home and handed it to an Arab woman. Mr. Hassan moved north to the Kurdish city of Erbil and lived there until the American-led forces took power last spring. He said he was now waiting for the Governing Council to repeal a law that allowed the confiscations.

"I am a patient man," Mr. Hassan said. "But what about the others?"

A local government office has received 3,000 property claims, said Hassib Rozbayani, an assistant mayor.

A mile from the tent village where the returning Kurds live lies the neighborhood of Qadisiya, where over the decades many Arab migrants have built concrete homes. Ahmed Abdullah, 27, an Arab, said his family was paid $33,000 to move here from Diyala 25 years ago.

Standing by his vegetable stand, he pointed to a residence across the street, which he said Arab owners recently sold to move south to Basra, fearing the house would be seized. In the last months, Mr. Abdullah said, graffiti had appeared on several houses saying, "Your homes will be your graves."

8. - The Daily Star (Lebanon) - "Cyprus’ right to veto could pose problem for Turkey":

Ankara must exert pressure for change on divided island to attain its EU goal

ISTANBUL / 19 January 2004 / by Nicholas Birch

European Commission leaders are not frequent visitors to Ankara. The last visit was in 1974, when Leo Tindemanns, president of what was then the European Economic Community, invited Turkey to apply for membership alongside the newly democratic Greece. In a move Turkish liberals see as one of the biggest policy disasters in recent history, then prime minister Bulent Ecevit declined the offer.

The Turkey that European Commission President Romano Prodi visited on Thursday and Friday last week has been transformed beyond recognition.

On the European Union’s waiting list to begin accession proceedings since 1999, its chances of joining Europe are expected to be made clear at an EU summit this December.

There is, however, one issue that has not changed. Tindemanns’ visit came shortly after Turkey had invaded Cyprus in response to a Greek-backed nationalist coup there.

The subsequent flight of around 160,000 Greek Cypriots from northern Cyprus left the island as it is now ethnically and politically divided.

However, Prodi’s visit comes as Greek Cyprus considered by everybody except Ankara as the only legitimate authority on the island prepares to join the EU this May.

Tired of poverty and isolation, Turkish Cypriots went to the elections last month in what many commentators saw as a referendum on a UN-sponsored plan to reunite the two communities.

Negotiations based on the Annan Plan had previously been sabotaged by Turkish Cyprus’ hawkish President Rauf Denktash, and parties supporting the Plan had promised to remove him from his position as chief negotiator if they won.

They did, but by the narrowest of margins.

With the new Parliament deadlocked, Denktash stayed on as negotiator.

Only Ankara, which observers say has always had the last word on Cyprus, can exert the pressure necessary to push change through.

The trouble is that Ankara cannot agree on Cyprus either. Indeed, its inability to agree goes to the very heart of Turkey’s ambivalent attitude toward its own chances of European accession.

In power since November 2002, the Turkish government is strongly pro-European, not least because it knows that its former Islamist cadres stand a better chance of survival within Europe than in a face off with Turkey’s staunchly secular military.

It knows too that Turkey’s hopes of getting a date from Europe in December depend at the very least on negotiations beginning again on Cyprus. If not, Greek Cyprus risks using its new right of veto to block Turkish demands for accession.

In his speech to Turkish Parliament on Thursday, Prodi clearly touched on this.

“It’s high time to end the outdated division of Cyprus and its capital,” he told MPs, before adding, crucially, “let me be clear this is not a formal condition but a political reality.”

It seems a minute distinction, cautiously expressed. But in essence Prodi’s words were an attempt to discredit Turkey’s eurosceptics, who see international demands for a solution on Cyprus as a continuation of British and French plans to divide Anatolia up in the aftermath of World War I.

For the eurosceptics ironically strongest in the left-wing circles that see themselves as the true inheritors of Turkish founder Ataturk’s modernization project Brussels has no intention of ever giving Turkey a date for accession. Once it has received concessions on Cyprus, they believe, it will then present a whole new series of demands to Ankara, including greater autonomy for Turkey’s 14-million strong Kurdish minority.

Ultimately, they say, Brussels does not want Turkey because it is a Muslim country. They quote with relish Valery Giscard d’Estaing’s comments last year that Turkey’s accession would mean the end of Europe.

Understandably, Prodi set aside a considerable part of his Thursday’s speech to addressing such suspicions. “Turkey clearly belongs to Europe,” he told MPs, adding that “we are moving closer to the goal of Turkey taking its rightful place among the peoples of Europe.”

Even his frank admission that “public opinion in the EU is not unanimous in favoring Turkish membership” seemed a backhanded way of highlighting what he described as the “profound transformation” in relations between Ankara and Brussels over the last couple of years.

The implication that the Commission looked kindly on Turkey’s candidature was given added weight by the widespread memories here of Prodi’s pro-Turkish stance during his time as Italian prime minister. It remains to be seen whether his irruption into Turkey’s internal debate over Cyprus will tip the balance in the favor of those arguing for a serious return to the negotiating table.

Released just over a week ago, a Turkish Foreign Ministry document made it very clear that the Annan Plan should be taken as the basis for discussions on the island. The government has subsequently said the same thing repeatedly.

But despite assurances by Turkish Chief of Staff Hilmi Ozkok that he thinks along the same lines as the government, it is clear that there are dissenters in the ranks of the army.

Military documents published last week by the eurosceptic daily Cumhuriyet accusing the Foreign Ministry of having a “surrender mentality” caused a major stir here. On Saturday, another senior general, noted hard-liner Hursit Tolon, entered the fray, asking rhetorically how those seeking a solution on Cyprus could have forgotten the blood of Turkish martyrs so quickly.

With Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan due to meet US Secretary-General Kofi Annan in Davos on Jan. 24, the publication of Turkey’s final standpoint on Cyprus has ominously been delayed until Jan. 23, when senior Cabinet ministers meet top brass at the monthly National Security Council.

It is easy to see the government’s inability to stand up for its own Cyprus policy as a sign of inexcusable weakness in the face of military bullying.

But, despite huge support for his government, Erdogan has good reason to fear the Turkish public.
Nourished on a diet of nationalist propaganda for years, and with Turkish newspapers even today far happier to publish the propaganda of Cypriot parties opposed to the Annan Plan than serious analysis of the Turkish Cypriot dilemma, it is just as likely to be impressed by Denktash-style refusals to compromise as by calls for calm and common sense.