6 July 2007

1. "Torture 'still common in Turkey'", widespread use of torture is continuing in Turkey despite the government's "zero tolerance" policy, says human rights group Amnesty International.

2. "Turkish government wins court challenge to electoral reforms", Turkey's Constitutional Court Thursday rejected demands to annul government reforms introducing the election of the president by popular vote, a major victory for the Islamist-rooted ruling party.

3. "Erdogan Struggles With Generals for Ultimate Power in Turkey", when Turkey's army decided to block Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist-leaning presidential candidate in April, it didn't have to roll tanks into the streets. All it had to do was post a late-night notice on its Web site. The military's ability to almost casually thwart Turkey's democratic government is at the heart of the current campaign for the July 22 election. Polls show Erdogan's Justice and Development Party enjoys a wide lead in the race; a victory in turn may set up an even more direct confrontation over the issue that has plagued Turkey since World War II: who wields ultimate power.

4. "Election Campaigns Based on Security Fears", particularly the ruling AKP and the nationalist MHP are using increasing nationalism and anger over the continuing deaths of soldiers in battles with the PKK to score points. The main parties are unanimous in their support for cross-border operations.

5. "Three killed in unrest in southeast Turkey", two Kurdish rebels and a member of a pro-government militia have been killed in fresh violence in Turkey's restive southeast, security officials said Thursday.

6. "AK Party’s performance in foreign policy", the expectation from the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) when it came to power in 2002 was that political discussions would be shaped by internal agenda issues.

7. "TURKEY: Countdown Begins to Crossing into Iraq", the button of the stopwatch counting down the invasion of Northern Iraq by the Turkish army was probably pressed on Tuesday, at an impromptu meeting between Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

8. "Kurdish Activists Confirm Damning Human Rights Report", security forces in the north are accused of holding suspects without charges and subjecting them to physical abuse. Human rights advocates in northern Iraq say the findings of a new report accusing Kurdish security forces of systematic mistreatment of detainees come as no surprise, and express scepticism that international pressure will end such practices.

1. - BBC - "Torture 'still common in Turkey'":

5 July 2007

Widespread use of torture is continuing in Turkey despite the government's "zero tolerance" policy, says human rights group Amnesty International.

A new report acknowledged improvements in the Turkish criminal justice system in recent years.

But Amnesty said a "culture of impunity" allowed the authorities to escape accountability and the courts to disregard medical evidence of torture.

There has been no immediate response from the Turkish government.

'Sweeping changes'

The Amnesty report, published on Thursday, noted a fall in the incidence of torture in police custody.

But it also said the declared zero-tolerance policy could not be seen as effective "until real steps are taken to address the persisting issue of the failure to punish officials who violate the absolute prohibition on torture and other ill-treatment."

According to Amnesty, detainees in Turkey alleged they had been beaten, threatened with death, deprived of food, water and sleep during detention.

Some of the torture was said to have taken place in unofficial places of detention.

The head of Amnesty's programme in Europe, Nicola Duckworth, said: "Nothing short of a fully implemented policy of 'zero tolerance for impunity' will end the spectre of torture, other ill-treatment, killings and enforced disappearances which still blight Turkey's human rights record."

Turkey introduced a series of sweeping changes several years ago to the country's penal code, intended to bring Turkish laws closer to those of EU member states.

Torture was abolished and individual liberties expanded under the reforms.

Human rights are a key issue in its bid to join the EU.

2. - AFP - "Turkish government wins court challenge to electoral reforms":

ANKARA / 5 July 2007 / by Hande Culpan

Turkey's Constitutional Court Thursday rejected demands to annul government reforms introducing the election of the president by popular vote, a major victory for the Islamist-rooted ruling party.

The court's deputy head Hasim Kilic said a simple majority of the 11 judges on the panel ruled against the demand by Turkey's current president and the main opposition party to cancel the package of constitutional amendments.

"Six of our judges ruled that there was nothing unconstitutional about the reform package," Kilic told reporters here. "The package is still in force."

The ruling means that President Ahmet Necdet Sezer will now submit the proposed reforms to a referendum, widely expected to be held in the autumn.

A senior member of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), which drew up the reforms, hailed the ruling as a way out of the long-running deadlock over electing the next head of state.

"The nation will now be able to elect its president on its own free will," Bulent Arinc, an AKP member, was quoted by the Anatolia news agency as saying.

The Turkish people will provide the solution to the presidential elections "which have turned into a gordion's knot," Arinc added.

Turkish law requires that referendums be organized 120 days after the president approves constitutional changes. Since the amendments were published in the official gazette in late June, a referendum can be held in late October at the earliest.

The AKP rushed the reform package through parliament last month in a bid to resolve a political crisis that blocked the election of its presidential candidate by a vote of parliament, as the current law requires.

The reform package also calls for a once-renewable, five-year presidential mandate instead of the current single, seven-year term, and provides for general elections every four years instead of five.

Sezer, who has often clashed with the government, initially refused to sign the bill into law and sent it back for reconsideration to the AKP-dominated parliament, which voted it through a second time unchanged.

As the president does not have the authority to reject a law twice, Sezer asked the constitutional court to annul the reforms arguing that they were adopted hastily and with no "justifiable, acceptable reason" to change the presidential electoral system.

The main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) also said that the reform package was unconstitutional. It alleged that the balloting rules had been breached when the AKP rushed the reforms through parliament last month.

Kilic said the judges had voted unanimously to declare that the alleged breaches were outside their jurisdiction.

The AKP launched the constitutional reforms after having twice failed to get its presidential candidate, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, elected because of an opposition boycott of the vote in parliament.

The elections were called off after the Constitutional Court, petitioned by the CHP, said voting could not be held without a two-third majority quorum, which the AKP could not muster.

The stand-off forced Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to bring elections forward to July 22 from November.

The prospect of an AKP president prompted mass pro-secular rallies and a stiff warning from the army that it was ready to defend Turkey's secular order.

The AKP, the moderate offshoot of a now-banned Islamist movement, has disowned its radical roots, but many believe it still has ambitions to increase Islam's role in politics and daily life in Turkey.

Recent opinion polls say the AKP is still the most popular party in Turkey, leading its rivals in the elections by a wide margin.

3. - Bloomberg - "Erdogan Struggles With Generals for Ultimate Power in Turkey":

ANKARA / 6 July 2007 / by Mark Bentley

When Turkey's army decided to block Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist-leaning presidential candidate in April, it didn't have to roll tanks into the streets. All it had to do was post a late-night notice on its Web site.

The military's ability to almost casually thwart Turkey's democratic government is at the heart of the current campaign for the July 22 election. Polls show Erdogan's Justice and Development Party enjoys a wide lead in the race; a victory in turn may set up an even more direct confrontation over the issue that has plagued Turkey since World War II: who wields ultimate power.

``Justice should be very careful in the next few months because the military has a say in many laws and decisions, whether Justice likes it or not,'' said Ilter Turkmen, who served as foreign minister after a military coup in 1980, one of four since 1960. Erdogan's party, he said, ``has to compromise.''

How much it is willing to do so, and how the army reacts, will reverberate beyond Turkey's borders. The generals run the second-largest armed forces in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization after the U.S.; meanwhile, the European Union says Turkey must strengthen its democracy in order to win membership.

Buoyed by Growth

Six of the seven opinion polls held in the past month indicate Justice has more support now than the 34 percent it won in 2002, which gave it close to two-thirds of the seats in parliament. The party has been buoyed by 21 straight quarters of economic growth that have helped double Turks' average pay.

The struggle between Erdogan and the military reflects a deeper rift in Turkish society over Islam's role in government. Erdogan, 53, says his party represents mainstream opinion -- conservative and Muslim without being radical. The army sees itself as the guarantor of the secular principles laid down eight decades ago by modern Turkey's founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, himself a former general, and enshrined in the 1982 constitution drawn up under military rule.

By the time Ataturk died in 1938, he had established ``Kemalism,'' a doctrine that banned religious clothing, rejected social classes, established state control of the economy and labeled every citizen a Turk irrespective of ethnicity or religion.

`Fascist Movements'

``The 1930s was the era of fascist movements in Europe and Japan,'' Reha Denemec, a deputy chief of Justice, said in an interview in Ankara. ``I'm not criticizing the ideology of Ataturk, but the world has changed a lot.''

Retired generals, who in Turkey are treated by the local media as spokesmen for the military, warn the party against pushing too hard.

``Maybe Justice will get a good result in the election, but if they don't change their ways then there could be fresh elections within one or two years,'' former Major General Riza Kucukoglu, head of the Retired Military Officers' Association of Turkey, said in an interview in Ankara.

``Justice is trying to create a religious class in Turkey,'' adds Kucukoglu, who says he is independent and is merely expressing his opinion. ``This is against the constitution.''

Erdogan formed Justice in August 2001, two years after he completed a four-month jail term on charges of ``inciting religious hatred.'' Justice swept to power in an election 14 months later, pledging to lift curbs on democracy and religious expression, including a ban on Muslim headscarves at government offices and universities.

Prison for Adulterers

Erdogan, who attended a school used to train Islamic clergy, raised the suspicions of the military in 2004 by seeking prison terms for adulterers. He dropped the measure after the EU said it jeopardized Turkey's membership bid.

The same year, Erdogan clashed with President Ahmet Necdet Sezer after Sezer rejected a law allowing trainee imams to study at university. Last year Sezer, 65, rejected the government's nomination of an Islamic banker as chief of the central bank.

The immediate trigger for the current struggle was Erdogan's effort to install Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul as president. Gul would be the first Turkish president with an Islamist past and the first married to a woman who wears a headscarf.

Popular Vote

On May 1, the Constitutional Court halted parliament's election of Gul, 56, on a technicality. The decision prompted Justice to circumvent the ruling by pushing through legislative changes to elect the next president by popular vote.

The prime minister told a rally in the eastern town of Batman June 22 that this month's election might lead to a ``political crisis'' because of the dispute over the president.

Justice appeals to the majority of Turks, who surveys indicate favor a looser form of secularism than the army espouses. A May 8-13 survey by Istanbul-based Gena Arastirma Egitim Danismanlik found that 70 percent of voters aren't concerned about a president whose wife wears a headscarf.

Even so, more than a million people poured onto Turkey's streets in April and May to protest Erdogan's efforts to claim the presidency. Kucukoglu said his retired-officers' group organized the protests. The group didn't publicize its role ``because it would be misused by the western press,'' he said.

The army is now seeking to use the Internet and non- government organizations to bring Erdogan into line, said Hasan Koni, a professor of international law and politics at Bahcesehir University in Istanbul.

`Losing Its Stature'

``With the EU reforms, the military is losing its stature in Turkey, so now they're using civilian movements, most of which are attached to the Ataturk legacy,'' he said. ``The military is going to try and keep the presidency by these means and use the office to control Justice.''

Erdogan has made some moves to rein in the military, imposing stricter civilian controls on the budget, replacing the military chief of the National Security Council with a civilian and stripping the panel of its executive powers. His followers warn that any move by the army against him risks isolating Turkey politically from the rest of the world.

``It's not easy to close a party in Turkey any more because now we're ruling by European norms,'' Denemec said. ``If they do, then we'll be joining Cuba, Burma and North Korea, not the EU.''

Others aren't so sure. ``If Justice comes from the election with a big majority, then the military could threaten to close them down,'' said Koni. ``All it would take is another e-mail.''

4. - Bianet - "Election Campaigns Based on Security Fears":

Particularly the ruling AKP and the nationalist MHP are using increasing nationalism and anger over the continuing deaths of soldiers in battles with the PKK to score points. The main parties are unanimous in their support for cross-border operations.

ISTANBUL / 5 July 2007

Minister of Foreign Affairs Abdullah Gül, whose bid for presidency was thwarted by the boycotting of the election by the opposition party, has said that in order to protect the country, his party had not made a great issue out of the boycott.

Speaking at a rally in Ankara, he pointed to the decrease in inflation during his party's time in office and said "this is real nationalism".

Cross-border operations

In a discussion programme he joined in the evening of 4 July on Channel 24, Abdullah Gül commented on the controversial plans for cross-border operations into Northern Iraq, saying that "if the soldiers say we need to enter Northern Iraq tomorrow, we will enter".

He added: "We have no interest in Iraq territory. Our aim is to disable a terrorist organization [the Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK)]. In order to do that, we will do whatever is necessary."

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan referred to an agreement between Turkey and the USA, signed on 22 September 2003 and concerning the economic support of Turkey, as well as US operations in Iraq. According to Erdogan, Turkey did not commit to abstaining from unilateral action in Northern Iraq as a precondition for a financial grant.

Gül's and Erdogan's comments are an indication of the increasing support that a military operation in Northern Iraq has in Turkey. The Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK) has a base in the Kandil Mountain range, more than sixty kilometres away from the border.

Party mud-slinging

In recent political discourses there has been no mention of political solutions to the "Kurdish issue". Rather, the sole focus has become the battles between the army and the PKK, in which soldiers are dying almost daily.

The increase in anti-PKK rhetoric is also continuing in the mud-slinging between the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). Recep Tayyip Erdogan (AKP) has begun targeting the MHP in his rally speeches and had taunted the MHP: "Why did you not hang Abdullah Öcalan?", referring to the MHP's time in government. After PKK leader Öcalan's capture, the then coalition government abolished the death penalty in line with European Union accession conditions. Salih Kapusuz of the AKP has also revived the term "baby murderer" for Abdullah Öcalan, thus heating up emotions even more.

The MHP in turn has vowed to publish the signature of all AKP members of parliament who signed the bill to abolish the death penalty.

5. - AFP - "Three killed in unrest in southeast Turkey":

DIYARBAKIR / 5 July 2007

Two Kurdish rebels and a member of a pro-government militia have been killed in fresh violence in Turkey's restive southeast, security officials said Thursday.

The rebels, members of the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), were shot dead while planting a landmine on a road in the eastern province of Tunceli late Wednesday, the sources said.

In neighbouring Bingol, PKK militants killed a village guard, or a member of a local government-armed militia supporting the army in the fight against the PKK, the sources said.

The PKK notably stepped up violence this year.

The army has launched a large-scale crackdown against the group in the east and southeast of the country and amassed troops on the border with Iraq, where the militants take refuge.

The PKK took up arms for self-rule in Turkey's mainly Kurdish east and southeast in 1984. The conflict has claimed some 37,000 lives.

6. - Zaman - "AK Party’s performance in foreign policy":

6 July 2007 / by Ahmet Selim Tekeloglu

The expectation from the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) when it came to power in 2002 was that political discussions would be shaped by internal agenda issues.

The contrary happened and under AK Party rule Turkey passed through the process of creating a foreign policy agenda deeper and denser than it has ever been. We can line up the basic elements of this process thus; speeding up the EU accession process; Turkey’s new move putting in taking the initiative on Cyprus; and, most important of all, the Iraq issue. Along with these the referents and expansions inserted by the AK Party’s foreign policy constructors into Turkey’s agenda became the matter of discussion: examples such as rhythmic diplomacy, problem-free politics with neighboring countries, Latin America and Africa years, taking the initiative in the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and co-presidency in the Alliance of Civilizations are just the first that come to mind.

The issue on which the AK Party had difficulties in this period, more than foreign policy dynamics and its conditions, was the transitivity between internal politics and foreign politics. When a situation that could be considered relatively normal within the EU process kept on popping up at every step taken by the AK Party, it made control of the process more difficult. And this problem was felt intensely, especially during the visit of Hamas, which is now supported by various circles, including former US President Jimmy Carter, and under all tensions that still continue regarding the northern Iraq issue. The AK Party had serious problems in establishing comprehensible balance and harmony between foreign and internal politics. We would not be doing the party an injustice if we say that, while one part of these problems were shaped by provocative news in the media, the AK Party also displayed unsuccessful crisis management for some of these problems. As an example of this, we should consider the case of the crisis after Hamas’ visit.

This picture shows the crisis of the transformations in the balance of global powers and within Turkish foreign policy for the AK Party. We are in a period when America has clearly militarized its hegemony and when all conflicts are shaped on the ground of the Middle East. If Turkey had entered this period while following traditional Turkish foreign policies, if we had “wait-and-see” tactics, some of these crises wouldn’t have occurred. But continuing to follow this direction would cause a larger cost to be paid. Therefore we should assess the AK Party’s foreign policy exactly in accordance with this framework: a context where the balance of global powers has been shaken and is now in the process of being restructured. Turkey found two options before it in this process: it could be included into this course by continuously submitting itself to external forces or it could undertake a serious transformation and look for ways to evolve into more active politics. The AK Party’s performance in foreign policy clearly shows that it prefers the second option.

In this context it put forth the vision of “problem-free politics with neighbor countries.” Instead of being a country that adopts limited and distant relationships, often shaped by security concerns, with other countries, Turkey is becoming a nation that puts its problems on the table and is a regional actor. In this way the relationship network was seriously broadened with Syria, Iran, Bulgaria, Greece, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Russia, Ukraine and Romania. A critical point here is the rapid abolishment of the once prevailing psychology that Turkey is a nation “surrounded by sea on three sides, but by enemies on four sides.” In the Cyprus issue, described as having entered a dead-end street and being troublesome for Turkey, for the first time in many years Turkish foreign policy took the initiative. As an outcome of this, the isolated Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) was transformed into a country hosting high international delegations and attending meetings such as the OIC.

As for the Iraq issue, there were two significant breaks. The initial one was the rejection of the first bill, which was like an unfortunate bullet; a result of perspective discrepancies within the AK Party. We should be aware of the new symbolic powers and values that came out of this rejection, however. In the beginning they shocked some circles, but resulted in protecting Turkey from the quagmire of Iraq, preventing dense “passage” of foreign military, saving Turkey from becoming a side participating directly in the Iraq conflict and affected the relationships with states in the region and with Western countries. As it is for the back studies on the bill regarding the discussions, which mainly focused on Iraq and security issues, they didn’t take into consideration the positive outcomes mentioned above. When they are considered, we can say that the AK Party is actually following the right policies regarding this bill.

The second break concerns the problem of which side in Iraq Turkey should establish a relationship with, and the stress of this issue is still continuing. Historically, with the aim of providing security within relationships with the Middle East, Turkey was always a country that preferred narrow and shallow relationships. As balances didn’t change rapidly during the Cold War and the Middle East issue was relatively stable, this kind of relationship didn’t cause large problems. More recently the issue was affected by anxieties over national security and the rise of Kurdish powers in northern Iraq during the 1990s. Now there is no “old Iraq” and the whole infrastructure has changed. In this environment the issue of deciding with whom and how to cooperate is extremely important for Turkey. The AK Party, who initially followed policies based on a relationship with one group in Iraqi politics, is now adopting policies that give importance to establishing contact with different circles in Iraq and institutionalizing and deepening the relationships. We can say that today Turkey is the only country establishing relationships with different circles within the region. With this it is promising to continue “problem-free politics with neighboring countries,” including Iraq, to become an effective country in establishing relationships in the short term and to become the determining actor in the long term. As for turning this process into a harmonized relationship, it is again continuously sabotaged by reasons rooted in domestic politics.

Turkish foreign policy has broached some new areas during the AK Party period. These developments are related to areas of Latin America and African countries. Regardless of the fact that it is poorly represented on the political agenda, Turkey’s proclaiming 2005 as “The year of Africa” and 2006 as “The year of Latin America” is still extremely important. Relationships with these areas will be seen as supporting an increase in the number of Turkey’s relationships and conducive to efforts for representation at the UN Security Council. Because these steps would, in the long run, merge Turkish foreign politics with a broadened sphere of activity, this policy approach should be supported without making distinctions among parties.

The AK Party’s performance in foreign policy should be assessed under conditions of a period ruled by global transformation and tremors in the balance of powers. Protecting its interests while following traditional Turkish politics in these times is impossible. The price of staying in a passive position and following precedent means turning into a country that doesn’t take any initiative in foreign policy; a country that is totally exposed to the regional design attempts by external powers, not able to protect even its own basic interests. For this reason instead of narrow and shallow relationships shaped by the Cold War mindset, Turkey needs relationships, or relationship networks, shaped by different dynamics and visions. This obliges us to ask again the questions of what Turkey’s interests are and how they would be realized, and to provide answers in accordance to the dynamics.

Within this framework, the point that should be examined concerning the AK Party and its foreign policy engineers is that the mentioned questions were seriously asked by the government and it is controlling efforts to provide new answers to these questions. “Problem-free politics with neighboring countries”; opening toward Africa and Latin America; bringing representation within the OIC to the highest level; continuance of relations with the EU at a comprehensible speed; attempts to establish close relationships with different groups in spite of problems in Iraq; and following active-country policies should be taken as proof of these efforts. Of course these relationships are not without problems, and we could talk about many problems when we look at them individually. From the other side, the more important point here is that all these carry signs of a process of transformation into a country that is active in foreign policy, a country that is, within the framework of new dynamics, giving new answers to the old questions and a country that has the potential to become a central player. Maybe it is here that the disturbance of the balance between foreign and domestic politics could transform into positive dynamics and active foreign policies could prepare the basis for a transformation that would contribute the process of reconciliation between the state and people in Turkey. This is one of the largest favors that could be done to Turkey.

* Member of the Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research (SETA)

7. - IPS - "TURKEY: Countdown Begins to Crossing into Iraq":

ANKARA / 5 July 2007 / by Jacques N. Couvas

The button of the stopwatch counting down the invasion of Northern Iraq by the Turkish army was probably pressed on Tuesday, at an impromptu meeting between Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
The two men have, in theory, scheduled meetings on Thursdays, which are often not maintained, as they do not see politically eye-to-eye. The surprise meeting on Tuesday has sparked speculation that the assault is near. Cynics, however, say this is just another coup de theatre, which aims at shaking from the shoulders the United States and Iraq, who are clearly opposed to military action against the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) on Iraqi soil.

False alarms have been almost a routine since the beginning of this year, when the General Staff of the armed forces energetically requested the government's approval to move into Northern Iraq in large numbers in order to avenge the weekly casualties by the army in Eastern Turkey, caused by PKK armed militants stationed in refugee camps and villages in Iraq.

The Turkish army has been drawing plans since last year for a "total clean-up" of that region, but the government has avoided responding clearly. A wait-and-see strategy has prevailed within the Justice and Development Party (AKP), the ruling political formation.

Other events this week corroborate the growing belief that the incursion is near. The U.S. ambassador to Ankara on Monday had to publicly reject in dismay allegations by the Turkish press that his government has been selling weapons to PKK members. The United States, as well as the EU and Turkey, consider this organisation a terrorist one.

General Yasar Buyukanit, head of the General Staff, speaking on Tuesday at a security conference in the Mediterranean resort city of Antalya, criticised the international community for what he claims was lack of foreign understanding for the situation and cooperation with Turkey to "combat Kurdish terrorism" in Iraq directed against his country.

Gen. Buyukanit came out of a short period of silence on the subject, to which he had retreated after Prime Minister Erdogan had in late June declared that he did not plan to allow in the short-term massive military action in the neighbouring country. In Antalya, however, he was outspoken.

"While we maintain our struggle against this terrorist organisation," said Buyukanit referring to the PKK, "and expect international cooperation in this struggle, we are having difficulty understanding some positions and attitudes that we face. These attitudes not only disappoint us but contradict the basic notion that combating terrorism requires better cooperation."

More indicative, perhaps, of the signs of an impending incursion into Iraq by Turkish forces is the recent escape of a small group of PKK members who fled a refugee camp in North Iraq and crossed the border to Turkey to seek asylum.

At a press conference this week, organised by local authorities, they claimed that large numbers of Turkish Kurds were fleeing the region in anticipation of a Turkish advance, and that Turkish artillery was abundantly shelling PKK combatant positions.

There is suspicion, however, among observers that the escape and revelations may have been orchestrated by Turkish security services, within the context of psychological warfare, either to incite PKK activists in Northern Iraq to abandon the region, or to prepare the Turkish opinion for future events. Either way, such incidents and information from "beyond the enemy lines" are typical of pre-intervention activity and carry a message or a warning.

The meeting on Tuesday between the two Turkish leaders also indicates that Erdogan is in a situation where he has either to comply with the military, supported by and supporting Sezer, or face the consequences of his moderate approach to the handling of the Kurdish problem.

Not that long ago, on Jun. 13, the Prime Minister rebuked insistence by the military to cross the border into Iraq. This was consistent with earlier statements of intent to build productive relationships with political chiefs in Northern Iraq rather than punish their constituents for their support to the PKK.

"Steps to improve relations with the regional Kurdish administration might be taken in Northern Iraq, why not; as long as it brings peace and calm and paves way for positive developments. If every step we are to take will bring calm for us and for them, we are game anytime," Erdogan told Hurriyet, a national newspaper, Feb. 15.

The rationale for his decision in June not to authorise the invasion was that the problem was not really PKK presence in Northern Iraq but that of PKK armed activists within his country. "There are 500 terrorists in Iraq; there are 5,000 terrorists inside Turkey. Has terrorism inside Turkey ended for us to think about an operation in Northern Iraq?" he asked.

He was quick to add that the figures he gave were just for the purpose of illustrating where the real issue was.

But Recep Tayyip Erdogan seems to have his back against the wall now -- unless he has lured the President and the opposition on to his turf, a competence at which he excels. On the face of things, Sezer may have put Erdogan before an ultimatum. Either the Prime Minister authorises the invasion or it can be launched without his approval.

Sezer, as President, is commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Article 92 of the Turkish Constitution provides that the President may decide to order the armed forces to take action if the country is attacked while Parliament is in recess.

Parliament is indeed in recess, and the country suffers weekly attacks from Iraq-based guerrillas. The President has therefore free hand to act. Erdogan however, either because he got the message or, likely, because he saw a political opportunity, has been swift to accommodate the hawks and steal the initiative.

It would seem that he is planning to call for an extraordinary parliamentary session to seek approval for cross-border action. This may lead to a "yes" or a "no", but in any event, the people will have decided -- and the military and the President will have to abide by such decision.

Another reason for the government joining hearts with the military is that there is a growing number of AKP candidates and voters who would rather see decisive action against the PKK, regardless of the high cost and medium-to-low chances of success of the operation.

The opposition, particularly the CHP -- the left-wing party founded by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, father of the Turkish republic -- is capitalising on these popular feelings in view of the legislative elections of Jul. 22.

However, the timing for the green light to move into Iraq remains unclear. Launching the operation before the elections -- actually, a few days or hours before Jul. 22 -- could increase Erdogan's popularity. At the same time, it could lead to a postponement of the elections, due to a national emergency, an outcome favourable to CHP and probably sought by Sezer.

In this warm night in Ankara, the bets are open at the terraces of both the popular and fashionable cafés and restaurants of the capital. The gambling now is not on the "if" but on the "when" of the first Turkish shot on Iraqi land.

But the excitement, if any, is not shared by the shopkeepers, hotel owners and restaurateurs around the country. The clicking of rifle triggers and that of cash registers have never been in harmony. For them, the war can wait until the winter.

8. - IWPR - "Kurdish Activists Confirm Damning Human Rights Report":

Security forces in the north are accused of holding suspects without charges and subjecting them to physical abuse.

5 July 2007 / by IWPR staff and contributors (ICR No. 226)

Human rights advocates in northern Iraq say the findings of a new report accusing Kurdish security forces of systematic mistreatment of detainees come as no surprise, and express scepticism that international pressure will end such practices.

In a report issued on July 3, the New York-based group Human Rights Watch said the security forces in Iraqi Kurdistan routinely torture detainees and deny them the right either to have a fair trial or to challenge their detention.

The Kurdish Regional Government has pledged to investigate the allegations of abuse.

Human Rights Watch investigators interviewed more than 150 detainees and Kurdish security officials from April to October 2006. The advocacy group recommended that Iraqi Kurdistan significantly change its detention and legal practices by requiring that detainees be either charged or released, denouncing torture and ensuring fair trials.

The kind of violations outlined in the 58-page report were not news to human rights activists in Iraqi Kurdistan.

"We know that arrests have been made without warrants; torture has been carried out; and detention facilities operate with minimal human rights criteria," said Sarwar Ali, a lawyer and a human rights activist at Democracy and Human Rights Development in the Kurdish city of Sulaimaniyah.

Iraqi Kurdistan's main political parties – the Kurdistan Democratic Party, KDP, and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan – each have their own security force, both called Asayish. The Asayish units function independent of government agencies and answer to their respective political party masters more than to the executive, according to Human Rights Watch and local Kurdish activists.

"The party security establishments function outside the law, and many people are detained for several years without charges," said Ali.

Detainees told Human Rights Watch that security forces beat them with cables and metal rods and placed them in stress positions for prolonged periods. Most detainees were not officially charged and many were deprived of legal counsel, trials and visitors while in prison, the organisation maintained.

"Most of the [detainees] so far don't know what they are charged with," Mike Eisner, an adviser to Human Rights Watch, told IWPR. "They have no lawyers, and their families don't know where they are and how long they will be in prison."

Some detainees who had been acquitted were still being held, and most detention facilities were severely overcrowded and unhygienic, according to the report. Human Rights Watch also expressed concern at reports that United States and Iraqi government forces had transferred detainees who had not been formally charged to Kurdish detention facilities.

"The Kurdish authorities talk a lot about the principles of freedom and human rights, but this report and the US State Department's [human rights] report prove that democracy and human rights are no more than words in this region," said a lawyer, who asked not to be named because he works for the government.

"Asayish has the utmost power."

The Asayish forces are tasked with detaining individuals suspected of security-related crimes including terrorism. However, they have also detained journalists and protesters - usually for short periods of time - and have also been accused of holding members of opposition Islamic parties. Security forces frequently claim that these detainees are suspected terrorists, while Islamic party members say they are political prisoners.

A security source in Kurdistan’s capital Erbil, who spoke on condition of anonymity as is customary, denied that Asayish tortures or otherwise mistreats its detainees.

"We never resort to abuse," he said.

Jamal Abdullah, a spokesman for Omar Fatah, deputy prime minister in the Kurdistan Regional Government, admitted there were "some illegal activities”, but he insisted, “These are carried out by individual members of the security forces. They are not acting on instructions, and it is not systematic."

Abdullah said the Kurdistan government is taking the Human Rights Watch report seriously. Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani ordered copies of the report sent to the Asayish in Sulaimaniyah and Erbil - where the PUK and KDP, respectively, are dominant.

Abdullah said the government would investigate all cases of mistreatment "in a manner consistent with human rights principles".

Human Rights Watch said it was given full access to Asayish detention facilities and held several meetings with Kurdish officials. The organisation said the regional government had reviewed some cases and released hundreds of detainees, but it maintained that these efforts "have not translated into any discernible improvement for most detainees in Asayish detention facilities".

The organisation also criticised the Kurdistan National Assembly's human rights committee for not putting more pressure on the government to change its policies after committee members visited detention facilities.

The Kurdish government released 70 prisoners in June under a new amnesty law, but Goolnaz Aziz, a member of the human rights committee, said this did not apply to detainees held without charge.

The report could tarnish the image of Kurdistan’s government, which promotes the northern region as a progressive, safe "other” Iraq.

"We are part of the new political process in Iraq, and one of the major roles is to guarantee human rights at the prisons and detention centres. Such reported cases of abuse negatively impact the reputation and the credibility of the Kurdistan Regional Government," said Abdullah.

Rabin Ahmed Hardi, a prominent writer and critic in Sulaimaniyah, said the international community may be surprised by the report because the KDP and PUK have "painted a beautiful picture of Iraqi Kurdistan".

"It's too optimistic to think that the Kurdish parties will change their dictatorship-like behaviour immediately. It has become a part of their mindset," he said.

Hardi said international pressure would probably not change human rights policies in the region.

"Pressure needs to be mounted on the parties within Kurdistan," he said. "Newspapers, intellectuals and the public should talk about those violations and other issues constantly until the parties respond."

* IWPR correspondents Talar Nadir in Erbil, Rebaz Mahmood in Sulaimaniyah, and IWPR’s Kurdish editor Mariwan Hama-Saeed, currently in the United States, contributed to this report.