10 May 2007

1. "Pro-Kurd Party Unveils Strategy For Turkey Vote", Turkey's main pro-Kurdish party said on Wednesday it would field candidates as independents in July's general election.

2. "The battle for Turkey’s soul", Turkey's inner conflicts can be resolved within the current democratic framework.

3. "The battle for Turkey’s soul", over the years Turkish democracy has shown itself to be vibrant yet fragile. A string of military coups and interventions stand as testimony to the army’s self-appointed role as the guardian of Kemal Ataturk’s secular republic. The most recent instance came a mere 10 years ago—the so-called post-modern coup that led to the ousting of a previous moderate Islamist government.

4. "Turkey seeks constitutional change", Turkey’s government will press ahead on Thursday with a controversial attempt to change the constitution to allow a directly elected president.

5. "Welcome to the “Guardianship Regime”, Turkey: Quo Vadis? Opinion by Cengiz Candar, a former pecial advisor to Turkish president Turgut Özal between 1991 and 1993.

6. "Sarkozy says no to Turkey membership", European leaders have expressed concern about French president-elect Nicolas Sarkozy's opposition to Turkey's membership of Europe's club.

7. "European public’s views on Turkey’s EU accession", with both EU governments and citizens deeply divided over the issue of Turkey’s EU accession, this CEPS paper takes an in-depth look at attitudes towards Turkey, examining the key elements in determining support for and against EU membership.

8. "Despite Turkey's reforms, gay community says it lacks legal protections", Gays in Turkey say they lack legal protections and face social stigma in a Muslim nation with a secular tradition of government that has implemented broad reforms in its bid to join the European Union - but remains heavily influenced by conservative and religious values.

1. - Reuters - "Pro-Kurd Party Unveils Strategy For Turkey Vote":

Turkey's main pro-Kurdish party said on Wednesday it would field candidates as independents in July's general election.

DIYARBAKIR / 9 May 2007

Turkey's main pro-Kurdish party said on Wednesday it would field candidates as independents in July's general election in a move that could hurt the ruling AK Party's efforts to clinch a new majority.

The Democratic Society Party (DTP) took the decision to circumvent Turkey's high 10 percent threshold for parties to enter parliament. It has strong support in the mainly Kurdish southeast, but nationwide is unlikely to clear the barrier.

By running as independents, DTP candidates have a better chance of winning seats in the July 22 poll, which was called by the Islamist-rooted AK Party after a row with the country's secular elite over a separate presidential election.

"Our party assembly unanimously agreed to field candidates as independents," DTP deputy chairman Sirri Sakik told Reuters in Diyarbakir, the largest city in the impoverished region.

Turkey's parliament is due to discuss on Thursday a draft law backed by the AK Party that would make it harder for DTP to win seats as independents.

Sakik, whose DTP campaigns for the political and cultural rights of Turkey's large Kurdish minority, criticised AK's move.

"We say this constitutional change is not lawful because the constitution says such a change cannot be done within one year before the elections," he said.

"They are doing this just to deprive Kurds of their right to express themselves in the democratic arena. We see this as anti-democratic and an indication of the AK Party's double standards." Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's centre-right AK Party, in power since November 2002, has eased restrictions on the Kurdish language and culture as part of Turkey's drive to join the European Union, but DTP says much more needs to be done.

Mainstream Turkish parties, including the AK Party, are wary of DTP, suspecting it of having close ties to Kurdish armed separatists who have been fighting Ankara's rule since 1984 in a conflict that has claimed more than 30,000 lives.

The DTP says it is opposed to violence and seeks to improve the Kurds' situation solely through democratic means.

2. - The Economist - "The battle for Turkey’s soul":

10 May 2007

At A time when Muslim fundamentalism seems to be on the rise all around the world, the sight of somewhere between half a million and a million people marching through Istanbul in defence of secularism is a remarkable one. But then Turkey is a remarkable place. As a mainly Muslim country that practises full secular democracy, it is a working refutation of the widespread belief that Islam and democracy are incompatible.

That’s not the only reason why Turkey matters. It is a big and strategically important country, has the largest army in NATO after America’s, offers a crucial energy route into Europe that avoids Russia and is the source of much of the water in the Middle East. If the negotiations under way for its entry into the European Union succeed, it will be the EU’s biggest country by population. But the reason that the world’s eyes are fixed on it last week is the possibility that the army might intervene to limit Islam’s role in government. For if Turkey cannot reconcile Islam and democracy, who can?

Cyber soldiers

Over the years Turkish democracy has shown itself to be vibrant yet fragile. A string of military coups and interventions stand as testimony to the army’s self-appointed role as the guardian of Kemal Ataturk’s secular republic. The most recent instance came a mere 10 years ago—the so-called post-modern coup that led to the ousting of a previous moderate Islamist government.

On April 27 the army suggested that it might do the same again. Just before midnight, after a day of inconclusive parliamentary voting for a new president, the army’s general staff posted a declaration on its website that attacked the nomination of Abdullah Gul, the foreign minister, for the presidency, and hinted none too subtly at a possible coup against the mildly Islamist Justice and Development (AK) government led by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister who nominated Mr Gul. On May 1 the constitutional court annulled the first round of parliamentary voting for the president, saying not enough members were present. Mr Erdogan promptly said he would call a snap parliamentary election. Street protests, first in Ankara and then in Istanbul, have heightened tension. The cities’ coffee houses are buzzing with conspiracy theories.

Given the fractious state of the main opposition parties, and his government’s record over the past four years, pollsters expect Mr Erdogan to win another thumping majority. He may then choose to stick with Mr Gul for the presidency, or he may look for another candidate. But is unlikely to pick one who meets the objections of the army and the secularists.

Turkey’s secularists have always mistrusted the AK Party, which has Islamist roots and in government has sometimes toyed with moderate Islamist measures. They especially dislike Mr Gul and Mr Erdogan because their wives sport the Muslim headscarf, which in Ataturk’s republic is banned in public buildings. They fret at the prospect of such people controlling not only the government and parliament, as now, but the presidency as well. They fear that once the AK Party has got that triple crown, it will show its true colours—and that they will be rather greener. Given that a fundamental reading of Islamic texts sees no distinction between religion and the state, and that fundamentalism is spreading in the Muslim world, it is understandable that people should entertain such fears.

Yet they do not justify a military intervention such as that of April 27. However desirable it may be to preserve Ataturk’s secular legacy, that cannot come at the expense of overriding the normal process of democracy—even if that process produces bad, ineffective, corrupt or mildly Islamist governments. Algeria, where 150,000 people died in a civil war after an election which Islamists won was annulled in 1992, holds a sharp lesson about what can happen when soldiers suppress popular will. Of course, Turkey is not Algeria; but armies everywhere should beware of subverting elections. It is up to voters, not soldiers, to punish governments—and they will now have the opportunity to do so in Turkey.

They may not want to. Mr Erdogan’s government has been Turkey’s most successful in half a century. After years of macroeconomic instability, growth has been steady and strong, inflation has been controlled and foreign investment has shot up. Even more impressive are the judicial and constitutional reforms that the AK government has pushed through. Corruption remains a blemish, but there is no sign of the government trying to overturn Turkey’s secular order. The record amply justifies Mr Erdogan’s biggest achievement: to persuade the EU to open membership talks, over 40 years after a much less impressive Turkey first expressed its wish to join.

Who cares what Europe thinks?

Unfortunately, the EU’s enthusiasm for Turkish entry, never high, has visibly waned. Nicolas Sarkozy’s win of the French presidency on May 6, is another setback to Turkey’s ambitions: he is categorically against the notion of it ever joining the EU.

In practice there is no chance of Turkey actually signing on the dotted line for another decade. But the perception in the country that so many current members are against it matters, for it reduces the EU’s influence. Were the prospects of EU membership obviously brighter, the army would not have intervened as brutally. As it is, the EU’s mild condemnation was shrugged off in Ankara, especially when the Americans said nothing at all. Their influence in Turkey is also much diminished, mainly because the war in Iraq has inflamed anti-American feeling.

Given the West’s declining influence on their country’s actions, Turks themselves must resolve their political crisis. The best way to do that would be to reject the army’s intervention by re-electing the AK Party. The secularists’ fears of the creeping Islamisation are understandable; but the AK Party’s record does not justify it, and military intervention is no way to avert it. For the sake of the state they are trying to protect, Turkey’s soldiers should stay out of politics.

3. - Reuters - "Turkish parliament cancels presidential election":

ANKARA / 9 May 2007

Turkey's parliament officially halted on Wednesday a presidential election process that triggered a major political crisis and forced the Islamist-rooted government to call early national polls.

The parliament accepted Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul's petition to withdraw from the presidential contest, in which he had been the sole candidate.

Gul's withdrawal became inevitable after he failed to win enough backing from the assembly in two rounds of voting. Parliament elects the president in Turkey for a seven-year term.

"As there is no presidential candidate, there is no possibility of electing a president. For this reason, the voting has been cancelled," parliament's deputy speaker Nevzat Pakdil told the chamber in televised remarks.

A new parliament will now choose a president after the July 22 general election.

President Ahmet Necdet Sezer, who had been due to retire on May 16, will stay on as interim head of state until his successor can be chosen.

Turkey's secular elite, including opposition parties, top judges and army generals, had been determined to block Gul's election. They feared the ex-Islamist might try to undermine Turkey's separation of state and religion, a claim he and his ruling AK Party strongly deny.

The Constitutional Court ruled that at least 367 deputies must be in the chamber at the time of voting for the results to be valid. In the two rounds of voting on Gul's candidacy, parliament lacked a quorum due to an opposition boycott.

Analysts say the centre-right AK Party is likely to win most votes in the coming parliamentary election but it may fail to win an outright majority, forcing it to form a coalition with one or more smaller political parties.

4. - Financial Times - "Turkey seeks constitutional change":

ANKARA / 9 May 2007 / by Vincent Boland

Turkey’s government will press ahead on Thursday with a controversial attempt to change the constitution to allow a directly elected president.

The proposals follow the government’s failure to get Abdullah Gul, the foreign minister, appointed to the post. His candidacy led to Turkey’s worst political crisis in a decade after the military threatened to intervene because of his past links to Turkey’s Islamist movement.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, prime minister, rejected criticism from Tusiad, Turkey’s big-business lobby, that the amendment needed wider discussion. Tusiad said: “This package, which proposes important changes in the parliamentary system, needs to be discussed by society at large.”

Mr Erdogan said: “Parliament knows better than them” how to do its job.

The exchange reflects the polarisation of political debate ahead of a general election on July 22 that was called to try to end the crisis. It is also a sign of the government’s determination to score a victory after failing to get Mr Gul appointed. That defeat was its most serious setback since coming to power in late 2002.

Even if parliament approves the package it seems certain to be vetoed by Ahmet Necdet Sezer, the outgoing president. If the measures are not in place by the election, it is likely the new president will be chosen by the new parliament.

The first opinion poll since the crisis began on April 27 was released on Wednesday. It showed Mr Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development party with a 29 per cent share of the vote. Four other parties also had enough support to ensure parliamentary representation.

5. - Hurriyet - "Welcome to the “Guardianship Regime”,

9 May 2007 / by Cengiz Candar* / translated by the Inernational Initiative

“For many years now we have been writing how it was “a regime of guardianship”. In parallel with the political arrangements of the past years just as we were commenting how the guardianship situation was changing in one night everything overturned, we are back to the former situation.”
“In the previous coups they used to tell us that the coup was going to take place before it happened. One could also read the warning note (by the army) as a pre-notice but it is no longer possible to have coups in the manner of the previous ones. ”
“Coups no longer are a one night act, they now encompass a certain period. We maybe living is such a period.”
“We have the parliamentary elections before us now but the most important problem before Turkey now is being against politics. It is quite dangerous that the parliament as an institution can be discarded so quickly.”
“Reacting against things is good however there was a militarist spirit in these marches. Stance against politics and statements that invite the army was very discomforting.”
“I am not sure whether one could still call CHP a political party. Because all political parties give a natural reaction against the warning note by the army. The CHP did not react at all to the warning note… All the parties have a duty to protect the political arena. This is a measure of how democratic they are.”
“Does the unification of DYP and ANAP have a meaning politically? – I have no hopes of this reunification. Both of the leaders have too much power oriented mentality. It is a problematic unification. I do not believe the people will value it highly.”
“There are those who say; yes, so what let the army too openly state its political opinions. NO. The army can not state its political opinions, army must know its duty. As you can see with the warning note the society is now divided in two. This is the biggest damage that could have been done to Turkey.”

These sentences belong to one of the most important political sociology experts of Turkey, Prof. Dr. Ayse Kadioglu. Turkey is going through a period where she should listen to experts in the fields of political sociology and social psychology.

*** *** ***

Let’s take Ayse Kadioglu’s observations one step further: Turkey has returned back to a “guardianship regime”. Turkish politics is being re-designed by a “guardianship regime” that has regained control – or maybe they never lost control.
The most urgent aim of this “re-design” is to after the elections prohibit a parliamentary arithmetic that would carry the AKP to power with majority where it could change the Constitution by itself.
DYP-ANAP and CHP-DSP unifications are components of this “re-design” and are interconnected with the mentioned urgent aim.
12 September military coup shut down the parliament together with the Justice Party and CHP. The anomaly created within the political arena by the closure of political parties lead to the birth of other parties. These parties can be counted to be DYP, ANAP, People’s Party, SODEP, SHP, DSP etc. Later, DYP and ANAP on one side of the political spectrum and on the other side DSP and CHP are left.
This is what happens after military coups. On 27 May 1960 (another military coup) DP party was closed down; in its place first New Turkey Party later on Justice Party was formed. Hence splits from parties or such unifications come true after military coups.
If it was possible to split the AKP or if it was not in government if it was possible to shut it down then there would have been no need for DYP-ANAP and CHP-DSP to unify. “Unification” of these parties are wholly “due to re-designing of the political arena after 27 April 2007” and to make sure that no chance is given to AKP in the 22 July elections to form the government on its own.

*** *** ***

When the coup is spread out in time it is even more difficult and it takes longer to get out of it. And it requires very very long periods in order to see how one could proceed out of it…

* Among other things served as special advisor to Turkish president Turgut Özal between 1991 and 1993.

6. - Press TV - "Sarkozy says no to Turkey membership":

9 May 2007

European leaders have expressed concern about French president-elect Nicolas Sarkozy's opposition to Turkey's membership of Europe's club.

Sarkozy, elected with some 53 percent of the vote, has reiterated that the mainly Muslim Turkey "does not have a place" in the European Union, but would have a place in Asia Minor. However he has avoided saying exactly how he plans to oppose Turkey's membership, which has proved a divisive issue for the bloc's 27 members.

The EU is set to open negotiations with Ankara by the end of next month on three of the 35 policy areas all candidates must complete to join and France could, theoretically, block that happening. Amid the confusion, the European Commission has repeatedly urged France this week not to break the EU's promise to Turkey.

"We negotiate with Turkey on the basis of a mandate that was decided unanimously with the member states," Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso said after the right-winger's poll victory. "We should continue these negotiations and we recommend to the member states only to take a decision on whether or not Turkey should join based on the results of these negotiations," he said.

Turkey is unlikely to leap through Europe's door in the near future. The accession talks, which began in turmoil in October 2005, will take at least a decade to complete and Ankara has no guarantee that it will even be allowed in at the end of it all.

Some experts warn that Ankara could definitively turn its back on Europe, and public opinion there, is already low. Only around one third of Turks support the idea of joining, according to recent polls.

7. - EurActiv - "European public’s views on Turkey’s EU accession":

9 May 2007

With both EU governments and citizens deeply divided over the issue of Turkey’s EU accession, this CEPS paper takes an in-depth look at attitudes towards Turkey, examining the key elements in determining support for and against EU membership.

Using new data derived from questions measuring citizens' attitudes towards Turkey that have been introduced into Eurobarometer questionnaires recently, Antonia Ruiz-Jiménez and José Torreblanca attempt to prove that views for and against Turkish membership are multidimensional, with citizens using different arguments for both positions.

Specifically, they show that the likelihood of supporting or opposing Turkey's membership depends on whether citizens base their point of view on a utilitarian (weighing up costs and benefits before reaching a conclusion), identity-based (founded on Turkey being part of Europe in geographical, historical and cultural terms), or post-national perspective (linked to a rights-based EU founded on universal principles and emphasising democracy and human rights).

Ruiz-Jiménez and Torreblanca find that support for Turkish membership is mostly based on post-national arguments, and that opposition to Turkey's accession is mainly connected with identity-based arguments. They find that instrumental considerations such as costs and benefits are of less relevance.

The authors conclude that as far as public opinion is concerned, support for Turkey's membership is low and declining further. They believe that Turkey's future membership of the EU hinges on the relative weight of post-national and essentialist visions of the future Union. They claim that it does not depend on public opinion at the material level, as represented by cost/benefit considerations.

They suggest that public support is crucial if Turkey is to join the EU, and that the key to its membership lies in the way accession is argued and justified, rather than wholly in the way it is negotiated.

8. - AP - "Despite Turkey's reforms, gay community says it lacks legal protections":

ISTANBUL / 9 May 2007

In the 1980s and 1990s, Turkish police routinely raided gay bars, detained transvestites, and banned homosexual conferences and festivals.

Next month, in a sign of how the state has loosened up, gay activists will hold forums on several university campuses to discuss their rights and the discrimination they still face.

Gays in Turkey say they lack legal protections and face social stigma in a Muslim nation with a secular tradition of government that has implemented broad reforms in its bid to join the European Union - but remains heavily influenced by conservative and religious values. For the most part, they face less pressure than in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries where Islamic codes are enforced with more rigor.

However, Turkey's homosexuals are jostling for more rights in a crowded field.

The historical feud between Turks and Armenians, as well as the concerns of ethnic Kurds and minority Christians, attract more international attention and pressure for change on the Turkish government.

"There are so many problems in Turkey," Ali Erol, a member of the gay rights group Kaos GL, said in an interview in his office in Ankara, the Turkish capital. "It looks as though gay rights are put down below in the list of things to be taken care of."

In March, the chief editor of the group's magazine, also named Kaos GL, was acquitted of charges that he had illegally published pornography in a July 2006 issue after a judge noted that copies were seized before they
were put on sale. The editor, Umut Guner, could have faced several years in jail if convicted.

The issue that got the magazine in trouble showed two images of men in explicit sexual poses, beside an article that editors described as an analysis of issues relating to pornography. The magazine first published in 1994, and became legal when it secured a license five years later. It comes out every two months, and has a circulation of up to 1,000.

In recent years, Turkey reworked its penal code to bring it into line with European standards. The new version does not specifically ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, although the issue was
discussed at the draft stage.

Justice Ministry officials had said that laws barring discrimination on the basis of gender, race, ethnicity, religion and political views were enough to protect its citizens.

"There are some 'hate crime' articles in the criminal code, but they are not used appropriately," said Levent Korkut, head of Amnesty International's operations in Turkey. "Impunity is a problem in this
area."

He noted that even some Turks who describe themselves as liberals say: '"We don't want to protect these people.'"

Gay sex is not a crime in Turkey, and some clubs and cinemas in big cities openly cater to homosexuals. Gay and lesbian societies exist at several universities. But the vast majority of homosexuals remain discreet in a country where liberal views have yet to make inroads in rural areas and many urban settings. Municipalities have some leeway to introduce laws safeguarding "morality," which gay activists view as a potential threat to their freedom.

Some gays, notably poet Murathan Mungan and the late singer Zeki Muren, achieved celebrity status and openly acknowledged their sexual orientation. Similarly, historians and novelists have referred to a degree
of tolerance for gay sex among some sectors of the elite during the Ottoman Empire centuries ago.

Yet, for many, being homosexual is an exercise in deception. One gay man, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he was distraught years ago because high school classmates kept calling him "ibne," a derogatory word for gay in Turkish.

The man, now a university student, said he avoids physical contact with his boyfriend when they are in public, and passes him off as a close friend. He said he is often mocked if he wears an article of clothing that people think is feminine.

Unable to find regular jobs, many transvestites and transsexuals work as prostitutes, an often dangerous profession that has led to the murders of some at the hands of clients.

Some deadly "hate crimes" were never publicized because police did not reveal the sexual orientation of the victims, according to gay activists.

In some cases, they said, gays who were harassed or physically harmed because of their orientation did not report the incident or go to court because they wanted to avoid scrutiny.

The European Union has funded gay groups in Turkey, which sometimes coordinate with the Turkish Ministry of Health and other government agencies. Kaos GL has links to Lambda Istanbul, a gay group in Turkey's
biggest city, and will host an "international anti-homophobia" meeting on university campuses in Ankara next month.

"We want to share and learn the experiences of all gays and lesbians who struggle against homophobia in the Middle East, Balkans, Europe and the other parts of the world," the group said in a statement. It has invited international speakers, including journalists and European lawmakers who will discuss gay issues in their own countries.

The Kaos GL magazine paid tribute to Hrant Dink, an ethnic Armenian journalist who was allegedly slain by extremist nationalists in January, by printing a somber image of him on the back cover of a recent issue.

"Those people who murdered Hrant Dink do not like us either," Erol said.