18 May 2004

1. "Talking Turkey", only weeks after starting to digest its biggest enlargement, European Union leaders must soon decide whether to give Turkey - which could become the Union's most populous member state - the go-ahead to start accession negotiations. A lot hangs on the outcome.

2. "Blair champions Turkish EU bid", UK Premier Tony Blair has staunchly defended Turkey’s application to join the EU and pledged to end the isolation of Northern Cyprus.

3. "Political and human rights still impede Turkish EU entry", with only months to go before the Commission is due to give its opinion on Turkish EU membership, the EU says there are still concerns over Turkish human rights standards.

4. "Women of Siirt rebel against male dominance on streets", streets belong to everyone.

5. "Referendum would address generations of injustice", the assassination of the president of Iraq's Governing Council makes it crystal clear the US is failing to create the minimal law and order needed for any sort of orderly transfer of power to take place by June 30.

6. "Turkish Cypriot president: No re-election", Turkish Cypriot President Rauf Denktas has signaled he would not seek re-election.

1. - The Financial Times - "Talking Turkey":

18 May 2004

Only weeks after starting to digest its biggest enlargement, European Union leaders must soon decide whether to give Turkey - which could become the Union's most populous member state - the go-ahead to start accession negotiations. A lot hangs on the outcome.

Turkey, the republic created from the debris of the Ottoman empire 80 years ago by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, has been in Europe's ante-room since applying for membership in 1963, and a formally recognised candidate since 1999. At their summit in December, EU leaders have promised to decide whether entry talks can now start.

We believe that they should.

In principle, the decision rests on whether Ankara has adopted and implemented a range of democratic reforms and human and minority rights provisions. The government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whose Justice and Development party (AKP) won a landslide at the end of 2002, has made impressive strides forward.

A series of legislative packages has enshrined freedom of association and expression, abolished the death penalty and criminalised the use of torture, and begun to give the Kurds their rights. Above all, by constitutional reform and political acuity, Mr Erdogan has managed to curb the power of the army. This is all the more remarkable given how the generals - deeply suspicious of the AKP's Islamist roots - tried to prevent Mr Erdogan coming to power. This untried government also managed to keep Turkey out of the universally unpopular US war in Iraq, as well as to turn the political tables on Cyprus, where it is now the Greek rather than the Turkish Cypriots who are obstructing the reunification of the island.

These are achievements of a high order that show what a powerful machine for reform the EU can be to those states determined to join it.

Europe cannot now just turn this machine off - through expedient filibusters some of its leaders are beginning to rehearse - without the risk of throwing that reform process into reverse. Yet Turks must also realise that reform is in any case in their own interests - and be much more aware how political this issue is, and how events can conspire against them.

The EU constitution, for example, suddenly reappeared on the agenda after the unexpected change of government in Spain. Some member states are wondering if they can get it ratified, especially by referendum, if Ankara gets the green light in December. The first stirrings of debate about Turkish entry, moreover, are in danger of colliding with the politician and media-induced hysteria about immigration in general and Muslims in particular.

Yet slamming the gates of Brussels would leave Turkey isolated and growling on the borders of Europe, its pro-western consensus in tatters and the darker forces of the Turkish right unleashed. Absorbing Turkey, maybe in a decade's time, will be an enormous challenge, but not nearly as enormous as the risk of cutting it adrift.

2. - EUpolitix.com - "Blair champions Turkish EU bid":

18 May 2004

UK Premier Tony Blair has staunchly defended Turkey’s application to join the EU and pledged to end the isolation of Northern Cyprus.

On a visit to Ankara, Blair hit out at critics of Turkey’s EU membership bid, saying that there could be no further barrier to its joining if Ankara met the conditions set by Brussels.

“If it complies with the Copenhagen criteria, there can be no other obstacles to Turkey’s membership of the EU,” said Blair, reported in the FT.

“Britain wants to see Turkey in the EU and support its membership,” he said, adding that Ankara had made “tremendous progress” in meeting a raft of economic, social and judicial reforms, known as the EU’s ‘Copenhagen’ criteria.

EU leaders will decide by the end of 2004 whether to open formal membership talks with Turkey on the basis of a European Commission assessment of its progress.

Blair’s clear endorsement of Turkey’s aim to join the EU club come amid growing debate in some large member states, notably France and Germany, about Ankara’s suitability for membership.

French President Jacques Chirac, who faces significant opposition to Turkey’s bid from within his own centre-right UMP party, recently said that accession talks could take between ten and 15 years.

Calls have also be increasing from German opposition leaders for Turkey to be granted a “special status” rather than full membership.

Tony Blair also made clear on his visit that attempts to reach a final settlement for the divided island of Cyprus will not be derailed by the recent failure of Southern Cyprus to approve a reunification plan.

“We must act now to end the isolation of Northern Cyprus,” he said at a press conference after talks with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Blair called for speedy action to relax the EU trade embargoes imposed on the Turkish-controlled north and for the ban on direct flights between northern Cyprus and the UK to lifted.

3. - EUobserver - "Political and human rights still impede Turkish EU entry":

BRUSSELS / 18 May 2004 / by Lisbeth Kirk

With only months to go before the Commission is due to give its opinion on Turkish EU membership, the EU says there are still concerns over Turkish human rights standards.

A joint report - agreed on by the EU - is deeply critical of some aspects of Turkey's human rights laws and express concerns about implementation in other areas.

The report is due to be presented to the Turkish foreign minister Abdullah Gül today (18 May) when he visits Brussels for regular talks with the EU.

Turkey has been an EU candidate for decades, but still has a long way to go before living up to the criteria set for members of the EU club, the position paper points out.

"In spite of the reforms, there are still a great number of provisions which could be interpreted so as to unduly restrict the exercise of fundamental freedoms", says the document.

Civil control of the military
The report is also critical of the role of the Turkish military and presses for civil control, aligned with the practise in EU member states.

It also says the Turkish parliament must exert full control of defence expenditure.

While welcoming the adoption of a further constitutional reform package by the Turkish parliament on 7 May as "another significant step forward", the report calls for effective implementation of the reforms.

With its sprawling geographical size and weak administration, Turkey has long had difficulties implementing decisions taken in Ankara in the whole of the country.

Since revisions were made on the status of languages other than Turkish, only three schools have started Kurdish language courses and there is still no broadcasting in languages other than Turkish.

As regards freedom of religion the Turkish non-Muslim communities still suffer problems as regards property rights, the report says.

The European Union also notices that "internally displaced persons" suffer economic and social problems in the Southeast, a predominantly Kurdish area.

On the list of positive developments is the banning in all circumstances of the death penalty. But on the negative side the European Union says that it "understands that there are persisting cases of ill-treatment and torture in custody".

Leyla Zana

The also EU expresses deep disappointment with the decision taken on 21 April by the Ankara State Security Court in the retrial of Leyla Zana.

The Kurdish woman was elected to serve her Kurdish constituency in the Turkish parliament in 1991. She openly identified herself as a Kurd and was arrested in 1994 and sentenced to 15 years in jail.

The European Parliament awarded her its Sakharov Prize in 1995.

Economic success

But while the criticism on human rights is still grave, Turkey is scoring well in the economic spheres.

"Productivity-led output growth has remained significantly stronger than expected (5.8% in 2003 after the 7.8% increase in 2002). Inflation continues to decline, notes the report.

Such economic development is something many EU finance ministers can only dream of seeing in their own countries.

Turkey must however ensure effective implementation of anti-corruption measures and establish an anti-corruption unit within the prime ministry, the EU also points out.

40 years

Today’s report is an early indication of what might be the content of the report that will be written by the European Commission in autumn.

On the basis of this report the European Council of heads of state and governments will decide in December 2004, whether accession negotiations with Turkey can start.

This will come 40 years after the first agreement between the EU and Turkey - the so-called Ankara Agreement - came into force on 1 December 1964.

4. - Turkish Daily News - "Women of Siirt rebel against male dominance on streets":

Streets belong to everyone

ANKARA / 18 May 2004

A group of women from the Southeastern city of Siirt on Monday prompted a campaign in an effort to prevent men from conquering the streets of the city during summer time.

In the male dominated southeast region of Turkey, men often prefer to sit at coffee houses usually while women go to the fields and work.

It is considered indecent for a woman to pass in front of coffee houses.

Another problem is with summer approaching coffee house owners tend to place tables and chairs onto the pavement making it difficult for the women of the city to walk without upsetting the men.

A group of Siirt women have started to collect signatures in an effort to prevent coffee house owners from putting tables on the streets.

"Women in the city are highly disturbed due to this habit. They cannot freely walk on the streets," said Sevim Yildiz one of the mentors of the signature campaign.
Things are different in other regions

In contrast with Siirt, social life is different in big cities and western parts of the country.

The Turks' early religion, shamanism, granted equal relations to all genders. After the Turks conquered Anatolia in the 11th century, the traditions of shamanism were still valid.

In Anatolia, engaged couples competed in horse races and wrestled before they got married. In some parts of Anatolia, we can still see the remnants of this tradition.

In the early years in Anatolia, Turkish men and women, shared everything equally, women under shamanism were highly respected and had major roles in administration and social life.

With the emergence of Islam in Anatolia roles began to change. Once they had arm wrestled with men, but now women had less responsibility outside.

Men and women fought side by side in the Turkish War of Independence, creating an environment that brought the two together again. After the war, during the efforts to form the new republic, men and women joined forces.

Women returned to social and economic life.

However, the underdeveloped southeastern region still suffers from gender inequality. The region is known for honor killings and a low rate of female education.

5. - The Australian - "Referendum would address generations of injustice":

18 May 2004 / by Shlomo Avineri*

The assassination of the president of Iraq's Governing Council makes it crystal clear the US is failing to create the minimal law and order needed for any sort of orderly transfer of power to take place by June 30.

Barely two months ago, the signing of a constitutional document by a US-appointed group of unelected Iraqi officials was heralded as if it were the re-enactment of America's constitutional convention in Philadelphia in 1787.

But by now it is clear this is a worthless piece of paper. No imposed constitution, however elegant it may be, will be helpful to coalition forces when confronted with the type of mayhem seen in Iraqi towns such as Fallujah and Najaf.

In the Kurdish region of northern Iraq, however, the situation is completely different. In the past 10 years, under the protection of the allies' no-fly zone, and even more so since the toppling of Saddam Hussein, the Kurdish regional government has been able to establish and sustain a relatively orderly administration. It has overcome tribal and party differences and created a de facto functioning government, with an impressive record on development issues such as education, irrigation, and construction – and, above all, with no violence.

Confronted with the debacle in the rest of (Arab) Iraq, the question has to be asked why the US-led coalition should not hold a referendum in the Kurdish region, asking the population how they would like to be ruled. After all, the Kurds have, by any internationally accepted standards, a right to self-determination.

Historically, the Kurds – who are distinct in language, culture and historical consciousness from Arabs – never had their day in court. After World War I and the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the victorious Allies promised them a state of their own – a promise that was cynically betrayed when British and French imperial interests took precedence. Since then, the Kurds have suffered under the despotic rule of rival ethnic groups.

There are obvious obstacles to holding such a referendum, primarily because the US does not have a mandate to dispose of Iraq as it pleases. But the same goes for the rest of Iraq: the US is now lamely asking for a UN resolution mandating a transfer of power to a legitimate Iraqi government – but such an authorisation is highly unlikely, nor is there anyone in Iraq to whom authority can conceivably be transferred.

Why should the one region – and people – who run an orderly government, are not involved in murder, attacks on mosques and suicide bombing of schoolchildren, be penalised?

Another objection is the opposition of Turkey – and, to a lesser degree, Iran and Syria – to granting the Iraqi Kurds self-determination. But if one thinks in terms of universal norms of human rights, what right has Turkey to dictate internal development in another country? After all, nobody accepts Israel's claim to oppose as a matter of principle the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.

The same should apply to Turkey. If Turkey grants its own Kurdish minority more cultural and language rights and allows legitimate Kurdish political representation in the Turkish parliament, the willingness of Turkish Kurds to oppose Ankara will be diminished. In the 19th century, the joint interests of the authoritarian Russian, German and Austrian empires prevented the establishment of a free Poland; such unholy alliances have no place in the 21st century.

Recently, under the aegis of the United Nations, a referendum on the future of Cyprus was held within the island's Greek and Turkish communities. The outcome was paradoxical, and not to the liking of those who initiated it, but the right of the communities to determine their future was accepted. Why not in Iraqi Kurdistan?

Perhaps to assuage political fears – and considerations of international law – any plebiscite in the Kurdish region should, initially, have only a consultative status. But it will give legitimate expression to the will of a people long oppressed and entitled to their place in the sun.

Such a referendum may also concentrate minds among the Arab Sunnis and Shi'ites in Iraq, when they come to realise it is their violence that is dismantling Iraq. Perhaps they may decide violence is counter-productive and carries its own penalties, and may then follow the Kurdish example of curbing violence, which would help put Iraq together again without recourse to permanent repression.

If not, at the very least, the injustice suffered by the Kurdish people for generations would, at long last, be rectified.

*Shlomo Avineri is Professor of Political Science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem

6. - UPI - "Turkish Cypriot president: No re-election":

NICOSIA / 17 May 2004

Turkish Cypriot President Rauf Denktas has signaled he would not seek re-election.

"I have done my best during my term in office. For me to continue in office would not be beneficial," he said according to his office's website.

Denktash strongly campaigned against United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan's plan for the island's reunification.

However, in the April 24 referenda, the Turkish Cypriots overwhelmingly voted for that plan.

The plan fell through because the island's Greeks rejected it.

Denktash, now in his fourth term, will be 81 next May when the elections are due.

"It is my right to live the rest of my life on my own if I have more days to live," he said.