16 July 2004

1. "Turkey condemned by rights court for curbing free speech", the European Court of Human Rights on Thursday condemned Turkey for violating the freedom of expression of three political activists by jailing them for allegedly inciting racial hatred.

2. "EU Commission not satisfied with DEP verdict", the European Union Commission has expressed disappointment over this week's verdict by Turkey's Supreme Court on four former Kurdish deputies to receive a second trial, characterizing the decision as "unsatisfactory."

3. "Leyla Zana and colleagues are accused of the crime of speaking Kurdish", the same mentality predominates in Turkey today as 10 years ago when Leyla Zana, Hatip Dicle, Orhan Dogan and Selim Sadak were imprisoned for speaking in Kurdish and seeking fraternal relations and mutual understanding between the Kurdish and Turkish peoples.

4. "Thirty years ago, Turkish troops landed in Cyprus", Thirty years after its soldiers landed in Cyprus, Turkey is the only country in the world to recognise the mini-state that occupies the north of the divided Mediterranean island, ties up 35,000 troops and swallows huge sums of money from Ankara.

5. "What do the Kurds want?", prominent Kurdish politician Mehmud Osman* writes about the concerns and aspirations of Iraq's Kurdish population

6. "Olmert visit melts Turkish ice - but doesn't break it", Ehud Olmert was unrivaled as Israel's envoy to Turkey following a period of cold gusts from Ankara. While his visit was supposed to result in the signing of a technology development agreement, it did not, mostly because the Turks were not ready. However, there were a lot of Turkish smiles and back-slapping.

1. - AFP - "Turkey condemned by rights court for curbing free speech":

STRASBOURG / 15 July 2004

The European Court of Human Rights on Thursday condemned Turkey for violating the freedom of expression of three political activists by jailing them for allegedly inciting racial hatred.

The three members of the Freedom and Solidarity Party were convicted in 1997 and sentenced to two years each in jail on charges of inciting racial hatred.

They had been detained during a World Peace Day demonstration in possession of a party pamphelet that accused the Turkish authorities of torturing and killing ethnic Kurdish civilians during their campaign to crush Kurdish separatists in southeastern Turkey.

The pan-European rights court said in a statement that the three "had not incited people to use violence or to resort to armed resistance or uprising and had not engaged in hate speech". It said their punishment by Turkey had been "disproportionate (and) unnecceasry in a democratic socierty".

The court ruled the three activists had legitimately feared not having an impartial trial as they were tried in a state security court that included a military judge. The three were jointly awarded 15,000 euros (18,500 dollars) in damages plus 2,500 euros for legal costs and expenses.

2. - Turkish Daily News - "EU Commission not satisfied with DEP verdict":

ANKARA / 16 July 2004

The European Union Commission has expressed disappointment over this week's verdict by Turkey's Supreme Court on four former Kurdish deputies to receive a second trial, characterizing the decision as "unsatisfactory."

"The commission is upset that still a satisfactory conclusion has not been reached on the issue," said Jean-Christophe Filori, EU Enlargement Commissioner Guenter Verheugen's spokesman, according to the Anatolia news agency.

Filori said they welcomed the overturning of a 15-year imprisonment decision of a state security court (DGM) for the deputies but will closely examine the retrial process.

Turkey's Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Wednesday that four former deputies of the defunct Democracy Party (DEP) should receive a second retrial, overturning on procedural grounds a previous verdict which upheld their conviction for links to the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) terrorists.

The four ex-deputies, including a one-time Nobel Prize nominee Leyla Zana, will now face retrial in a criminal court. Their trial and first retrial were overseen by a State Security Court (DGM), recently abolished under European Union-inspired reforms.

The four were sentenced to imprisonment in 1994 for links to the PKK by a DGM but this ruling was overturned by a subsequent decision of the European Court of Human Rights, which said the ex-deputies did not receive a fair trial.

Last month, Zana and three colleagues, Orhan Dogan, Selim Sadak and Hatip Dicle, were released under an EU-inspired reform abolishing the DGMs, pending trial.

The European circles are closely following the issue as time is nearing the December summit in which EU leaders will decide open accession talks with Turkey.

Turkey, having almost completed her homework, strongly expects to get the go-ahead in the EU summit to start entry talks at the beginning of 2005.

Turkey's Parliament has enacted a flurry of EU-inspired reforms, including abolition of the death penalty, limiting military influence in Turkish politics and granting greater rights to its Kurdish citizens.

The EU commission is now preparing a progress report on Turkey's human rights performance that is expected to be released in the fall. The report will have great influence on the EU leaders' decision whether to start negotiations or not with Turkey.

The EU officials had regarded last month's decision to free Zana and her colleagues as a sign of Turkey's will to implement the reforms.

3. - Kongra-Gel - "Leyla Zana and colleagues are accused of the crime of speaking Kurdish":

14 July 2004

The same mentality predominates in Turkey today as 10 years ago when Leyla Zana, Hatip Dicle, Orhan Dogan and Selim Sadak were imprisoned for speaking in Kurdish and seeking fraternal relations and mutual understanding between the Kurdish and Turkish peoples. The Turkish government keeps talking about "change, reform, changes in the constitution, and democratization" but at the same time accusing the DEP members of a crime for the same reasons.

At first it was the General Staff and then the Police Headquarters which accused the DEP members. As if they had committed a serious crime they said "they spoke in a language other than the official language" indicating to the public that speaking in Kurdish was a terrible crime.

This attitude has nothing to do with even the most basic democratic principles. It is utterly repressive.

The mentality that imprisoned DEP members of parliament in 1994 continues today.

The only difference now is that they cannot put them in prison because the DEP members are known internationally, but the ordinary Kurd is not just imprisoned but is tortured. These things happen it Turkey daily. The few "changes" introduced by the government are presented as a massive "revolution" which hide the true reality of the situation.

The pressure on parties and associations defending the rights of the Kurds grows daily.

Here are a few of the examples of what has been happening only in the last few days:

- The case was opened to close down DEHAP and its leaders were arrested.

- DEP members are under pressure and they have been accused of a crime.

- The pressures on KONGRA-GEL continue and the Kurds are criminalised.

- A journalist from DICLE-News Agency has been arrested and will be given 15 years prison sentence if charged.

- Egitim-Sen was taken to court to be closed for defending the right of education in mother language.

- The military operations in Kurdistan are becoming wide spread.

- The Kurdish peoples leader Abdullah OCALAN is in serious isolation conditions.

- Once again they are trying to ban villagers from returning to their villages and the plateau and there is a food embargo.

- Cases have been filed in court for 73 people including the European Member of the Parliament Feleknas UCA for "Speaking in a language other than Turkish" during the 28 March local elections.

Those that deny the Kurds, those who want democracy without the Kurds are allowed to claim that they are democratic. Those who ask for their language, culture, and identity to be recognised are shown to be against democracy and against peace. This is a kind of "secret war propaganda".

We call on the international public, in particular the EU to see the true face of Turkey and listen to the just demands of the Kurds. The Kurdish people, faced with the criminalisation of their parties and associations, continue to call for a democratic solution to the Kurdish question through dialogue. To ignore our plight will give legitimacy to Turkey¹s policy of denial.

4. - AFP - "Thirty years ago, Turkish troops landed in Cyprus":

ANKARA / 16 July 2004

Thirty years after its soldiers landed in Cyprus, Turkey is the only country in the world to recognise the mini-state that occupies the north of the divided Mediterranean island, ties up 35,000 troops and swallows huge sums of money from Ankara.

It was on July 20 1974 that Turkish soldiers landed at the holiday town of Kyrenia in the north in what was termed a peace operation. Five days earlier ultra-nationalist Greek Cypriots had seized power, urged on by the junta of colonels in power in Athens, with the aim of reuniting the island with the mainland.

Three decades later the bitter consequences of their coup can still be seen: a divided island, that has defied all international attempts at reunification, physical separation of the two communities, tens of thousands driven from their homes on both sides, a permanent United Nations military presence, the world's last divided capital.

The Turkish intervention followed intense international negotiations in the aftermath of the coup, led by newspaper publisher Nikos Sampson, who had previously fought the British for independence. He ousted Archbishop Makarios as president.

The Turkish prime minister of the period, Bulent Ecevit, ordered his forces to intervene on the evening of July 19, using the right accorded in 1960 to the states guaranteeing the island's independence (Britain, Greece and Turkey) to protect the island's Turkish minority.

On July 22 Turkish forces occupied Kyrenia. That evening Ankara accepted a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire. The Greek junta and Sampson's short-lived government collapsed.

Two conferences bringing together foreign ministers from the three guaranteeing states were held in Geneva from July 25 on. But Turkey, considering the fate of the Turkish islanders to be a national issue, denounced actions carried out against Turkish Cypriots by members of the armed ultra-nationalist Greek Cypriot group EOKA-B.

Between August 14 and 16 it launched a second operation to reinforce its military presence, occupying a third (37 percent) of the island and seizing the eastern town of Famagusta (Varosha) now a ghost town off limits. The two sides are separated by a UN-supervised 180 kilometre (110 mile) "green line".

The anniversary of the Turkish intervention is marked each year by a military parade in the north of the island, the so-called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, self-proclaimed in 1983, with a population of 200,000.

For the 30th anniversary Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul may be present. The party to which he belongs, the AKP (Justice and Development Party) was instrumental in launching the last round of intercommunal talks under UN auspices in 2003 to try to end the partition of the island.

But in April, Greek Cypriots voted massively in a referendum against reunification on the basis of a plan drawn up by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. Long-serving Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash also opposed the plan but his fellow Turkish Cypriots endorsed it, weakening bis political position.

On May 1 the Greek part of the island, the Republic of Cyprus, was one of 10 states to join the European Union. The Turkish part remains outside the EU, pleading for financial help and an end to its political isolation.

5. - Al-Ahram - "What do the Kurds want?":

Prominent Kurdish politician Mehmud Osman* writes about the concerns and aspirations of Iraq's Kurdish population

15 July 2004

Following the ousting of former President Saddam Hussein's regime, the Iraqis have been faced with a new reality on the ground, one that has since been dominated by the difficulties wrought by the United States-led occupation. And although it is well-nigh impossible to assess a period of 14 months in one article, I believe the Americans have made many mistakes in the post-war period. They have failed in their attempt to rule the country, and have instead added new complexities to an already difficult situation.

The Americans would have been better off had they allowed the Iraqis to rule the country themselves right after the war ended. The Interim Governing Council (IGC) -- of which I was a member until it was dissolved -- was not a successful experiment because it lacked the powers it needed in order to be able to function independently from the occupation authorities.

As far as my own prerogatives are concerned, I joined the IGC in order to represent the Kurds, and I think it safe to say that during our term the Kurdish members tried hard to work with their fellow Iraqis. I think one of the major fruits of such cooperation was the agreement reached between the IGC's Kurdish and Arab members on the Transitional Administrative Law (TAL), issued last March, which recognised the Kurdish language as official, and supporting federalism as an accepted political order in post- war Iraq -- therefore preserving the Kurdish rights for self-rule. But most importantly, the law also rendered it possible to expose and eliminate the policies of ethnic cleansing which were followed by the previous regime.

In all, the law addressed many long-standing Kurdish concerns, while constituting a good step towards a national reconciliation between Iraq's two major ethnic groups -- the Kurds and the Arabs. It includes a complete bill of rights. The law is good for both the Kurds and for all others in Iraq because it is based on the idea of having a secular Iraq state in which people will have their rights respected, not violated. At the same time it guarantees the preservation of Iraqi unity -- not by force, but through understanding and cooperation.

The TAL was supposed to be supported by the United Nations Security Council, but Resolution 1546 -- proposed by Britain and the US -- failed to recognise the law at all. This added to the Kurds' disillusionment with recent US policy in Iraq in general. This sense was clearly manifested in the joint memo written by the two Kurdish leaders Masut Barzani and Jalal Talabani to US President George W Bush last month in protest of the occupation authority's failure to include the law in the UN resolution.

This act of protest led to the Kurds being portrayed in a very negative light, especially in the Arab press. I believe that many misperceptions about the Kurds are propagated by the media, when all that this group has been asking for is that its rights must be respected and the history of its oppression must be taken into account in working out the final status and political structure of Iraq.

Meanwhile, we are working to ensure that a united and peaceful Iraq emerges from this dark period and that the occupation of our country comes to an end. We also want to see that government gradually regains control of the country and take us to the first general elections, and eventually form a permanent constitution which ensures that the rights of all Iraqi citizens will be respected and put into effect.

Our more immediate concerns, however, also have to do with the policies of two of Iraq's neighbours, namely Turkey and Iran. Though they may not wish to admit it, the two countries have problems with their Kurdish populations. Based on the difficulties facing Kurds in those states, it seems legitimate to be concerned about any possible Turkish or Iranian meddling in Iraq's internal affairs. For these states think that the Kurds represent a threat to their own national unity and security, and are thus wary of any attempt by Kurds across the region to improve their lot.

But what the Kurds really want is to have their long-standing problems settled once and for all. The legacy of Saddam's regime needs to be redressed, and the history of oppression balanced. The situation in Kirkuk is indicative of a widespread problem: the Kurds who were forced to leave their homes almost 20 years ago want to go back again, while the Arab residents do not want to leave a place they have been living in for so long. In order to address such problems in a fair and just manner, the Iraqi government ought to run a census in those areas so that their fate can be decided in a democratic way.

To those who are sceptical of Kurdish intentions in Iraq, perhaps it should be emphasised that when we talk of federalism in Iraq, we do not necessarily mean to imply that the Iraqi Kurds have separatist tendencies. After all, the Kurds have already been quasi-independent from the central government in Baghdad for the past decade.

It was only after Saddam's fall that the Kurds returned to Baghdad, and that was because we wanted to become involved in Iraq's fight for national unity, but on an electoral basis. According to our understanding of federalism, the central government would be responsible for all issues relating to national sovereignty. In other words, there would be one army, one foreign policy, one Iraq. But within this Iraq there would be a recognised Kurdish entity. There would be no separation, and federalism would only constitute a channel leading up to the achievement of a true and fair unity among Iraqis, rather than a force of division.

Another issue which stirred a heated debate -- particularly in the Arab press -- and led many commentators to question the Kurds' political agenda was the claim about an Israeli presence in Iraqi Kurdistan. As far as I know -- and I would have reason to know, given that I have close contacts with the governments in the two states -- there are no Israelis in Iraqi Kurdistan. Indeed, during the 1960s and 1970s, we did have a relationship with the Israelis, but this relationship was quickly shown up to be both detrimental to our interests as Kurds and outright dangerous, and therefore it is clear that we do not want to maintain it.

I think such claims have originated from agents seeking to drive a wedge between the Arabs -- particularly in Syria -- and the Kurds. Some of this propaganda may have come from Israel itself. We have always welcomed all those seeking to find out for themselves to come to Kurdistan and verify that there truly is no such association. And if there were, the Kurds would have admitted it.

In any case, it seems clear to me that there are much more pressing issues facing Iraq right now. The main problems emanate from the legacy of Saddam's regime and from the occupation of Iraq. Americans troops are still stationed in the country. The violence has by no means subsided.

When qualifying the situation in Iraq, one has to be very careful. Those movements which use violent methods in order to further their cause are by no means homogeneous. As far as I can see, they include foreign terrorists who mainly target Iraqi civilians, police and corporations. The second group is basically composed of those who were privileged during the Saddam years and are seeking to reinstate the old order.

Finally, there are groups of disaffected Iraqis who are simply opposed to the occupation, and their acts of resistance are a natural reaction to the situation that they find their country faced with. They neither belong to Saddam's camp nor to Al-Qaeda. I believe that dialogue should be established with the resistance factions, and that in order for a secure peace to be established in Iraq, their members should be granted amnesty and a sincere attempt should be made at integrating them into the ongoing political process.

For what Iraq needs now, more than anything else, is to press on with its process of national reconciliation. This is the only way to bring stability to the country, and to prepare the ground for a new, democratic Iraq.

* Mehmud Osman was formerly chief adviser to the Kurdish leader Mustafa Barzani. In 1975, he left the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) to form the Kurdish Socialist Party of Iraq. He is now an independent Kurdish politician, and was a vocal member of the now dissolved Iraqi Governing Council. The column is based on an interview with Al-Ahram Weekly.

6. - Haaretz - "Olmert visit melts Turkish ice - but doesn't break it":

15 July 2004 / by Zvi Bar'el

Ehud Olmert was unrivaled as Israel's envoy to Turkey following a period of cold gusts from Ankara. While his visit was supposed to result in the signing of a technology development agreement, it did not, mostly because the Turks were not ready. However, there were a lot of Turkish smiles and back-slapping.

The achievement is significant given recent harsh criticism leveled by Prime Minster Recep Tayyip Erdogan's government against Israel.

Olmert was the first senior Israeli representative to arrive in the Turkish capital after the recent rise in tension between the two countries. His reception had an element of uncertainty.

Positive development

But the extension of Olmert's meeting with President Ahmet Sezer, from 20 minutes to 45, and an invitation by Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul to his home for dinner, can be marked as a positive development.

On the other hand, Erdogan did not meet Olmert, explaining that he was busy with his daughter's wedding. However, he managed to meet with the visiting Syrian prime minister, and had he considered a meeting with Olmert essential, he would have made the time.

It also is worthwhile to question the decision by Israel's ambassador to Turkey to turn down an invitation to attend the wedding of Erdogan's daughter.

There have been those in Turkey who interpreted the envoy's absence as a continuation of the sulking dialogue between the two countries.

Indeed, beyond the smiles and declarations that Turco-Israeli relations are strong, no real gesture can back this claim. Gul, who is planning to visit Egypt in the near future, did not announce a date for a similar visit to Israel, and Turkish sources said the subject was not even raised.

Agreements that the Turkish government have frozen are still on hold, the helicopter deal that Israel hopes to share was not even mentioned, and as far as the Israeli-Palestinian dialogue is concerned, the Turks are still left on the outside.

Israel's relations with Turkey have not necessitated a microscope in recent years to the point where meetings between officials are measured either in time or by the width of their smiles.

The strong relations that have developed between the two countries are now different, but the change should not be overly attributed to the Islamic character of the current Turkish government.

Turkey seeks to join the European Union and needs to adjust its policies with the union; it is also concerned with developments in Iraq and needs the support of Syria, Iran and Egypt to prevent a Kurdish state; and the government cannot ignore public opinion on the Turkish street that, not unlike other parts of the world, finds Israel's policies in the territories unacceptable.