A ‘Política Externa da Turquia face ao Ocidente revisitada‘ in Mural Internacional, ano III, nº 1 (junho 2012)

A subida ao poder do AKP (Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi/Partido da Justiça e do Desenvolvimento) em 2002 – partido que governa a Turquia há uma década –, trouxe, progressivamente, uma visível aproximação Médio Oriente árabe-islâmico. Paralelamente, assistiu-se a uma deterioração das relações com Israel e a tensões ocasionais com alguns dos aliados tradicionais, nomeadamente com os EUA. Assim, nos últimos anos, temos assistido a um amplo debate nos meios ligados à política internacional, sobre o significado desta aproximação da Turquia ao Médio Oriente. Será esta sinal de um abandono da orientação de política externa pró-ocidental, que caracterizou o Estado fundado por Atatürk a partir de 1945, através de uma nova configuração motivada por influências ideológicas islamistas? Ou será que estamos perante uma abordagem de política externa pragmática e realista, motivada por imperativos económicos e de segurança, sendo basicamente similar àquela que encontramos frequentemente no passado otomano da Turquia? São estas as questões às quais se procura responder no artigo. Para o efeito, é efetuada uma breve passagem em revista da política externa do Império Otomano/Turquia face ao Ocidente, europeu e norte-americano, o que permitirá, depois, avaliar a mesma numa perspetiva histórico-política alargada. (Ver aqui o artigo completo.)

‘O crepúsculo democrático da Turquia‘ por Dani Rodrik

Quando questionado, recentemente, acerca de um professor de direito constitucional que foi preso por leccionar num instituto administrado pelo principal partido político pró-curdo do país, o ministro do Interior da Turquia, Idris Naim Sahin, não conseguiu esconder a sua irritação: "Estou a ter muita dificuldade em compreender aqueles que dizem que um professor não deveria ser preso, ao mesmo tempo que outros milhares de pessoas estão a ser detidos na Turquia".

Provavelmente, Sahin quis dizer que um professor não pode invocar tratamento especial perante a lei. Mas o seu comentário realçou, inadvertidamente, a nova realidade na Turquia, onde qualquer opositor do regime actual pode ser encarcerado, com ou sem provas, por terrorismo ou outros actos violentos.

Tribunais especiais, encarregues de julgar actos terroristas e crimes contra o Estado, têm efectuado muitas horas extraordinárias para apresentarem acusações oficiais que, na maioria dos casos, tanto têm de absurdo como de infundado. Por exemplo, alguns jornalistas foram presos por produzirem artigos e livros a mando de uma alegada organização terrorista denominada “Ergenekon”, cuja existência ainda está por confirmar, apesar de vários anos de investigação.

Da mesma forma, alguns militares foram acusados, com base em documentos descaradamente fraudulentos – aliás, produzidos de forma muito pouco profissional – que continham claros anacronismos. Um comandante superior da Polícia está actualmente a definhar na prisão, por alegadamente colaborar com militantes da extrema-esquerda, os mesmos que perseguiu durante toda a sua carreira. Estes processos evidenciam uma crescente rede, que arma ciladas a jornalistas, escritores, académicos, centenas de militares, milhares de políticos e activistas curdos, entre outros. [...]

Ver Público

O desapontamento da vitória para o AKP da Turquia

In this month’s Turkish parliamentary elections, the governing Justice and DevelopmentParty (AKP) won almost 50 percent of the popular vote, up from 46.5 in the previous elections. The success was thanks in part to Turkey’s strong performance under the conservative AKP; since 2002, Turkey’s economic growth has been behind only that of China and India. Still, the AKP fell short by three seats of retaining the supermajority - control of 330 out of 550 parliamentary seats, which gives a single party the ability to amend the constitution - that the party has enjoyed since 2002, when it first came to power. (Although the AKP increased its vote share this year, the secular, social democratic Republican Peoples Party [CHP] and Kurdish nationalist Peace and Democracy Party [BDP] registered higher gains, therefore stealing some AKP seats.) This is a positive development for Turkey’s fragile democracy, which has become dangerously polarized between the conservatives and the secular liberals. For the first time in nearly a decade, the AKP will be forced to seek consensus to govern, especially in regions where its electoral performance was weak: the country’s liberal Aegean coast, Thrace, and the middle-class neighborhoods of Istanbul and other large cities.

The new balance in Turkey’s government presents both historic challenges and historic opportunities. Since Turkey became a multiparty democracy in 1946, the country has never had a constitution crafted by civilians, instead making do with a series of charters developed by military-led parliaments. Recently, driven by almost a decade of economic and political development, majorities in both the liberal and conservative parties have come to support drafting a new constitution. The fate of such an effort depended on the outcome of the elections. If the AKP’s victory had been large enough, it could have gone it alone, creating a document that would have likely enshrined social conservatism. Since the vote was split, the drafting process will have to be more consensual. [....]

Ver artigo na Foreign Affairs

Crescente deterioração das relações entre a Turquia e a União Europeia

Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan has accused German society of "xenophobia" and the German government of "discrimination" ahead of a meeting with Chancellor Angela Merkel. The remarks follow an unfriendly encounter with French President Sarkozy.

Speaking to a group of ethnic Turks in Dusseldorf on Sunday (27 February) ahead of his meeting with Chancellor Angela Merkel in Hannover on Monday, Mr Erdogan said: "We are observing the xenophobia in certain European countries, notably Germany, with great unease ... Islamophobia is a crime against humanity, just as anti-Semitism is."

He urged German politicians not to feed the fear of foreigners, but also called on the 2.5 million ethnic Turks in Germany to try to fit in.

"I want everybody to learn German and to get the best level of education they can ... I want Turkish people to be present at all levels in Germany, in the administration, in politics, in civil society," he added, the German press agency, DPA, reports.

A day on earlier on Saturday, in an interview with the regional daily, the Rheinische Post, the Turkish premier came close to accusing Ms Merkel's political party of racism. [...]

Ver notícia em EUObserver

Grécia planeia a construção de muro contra imigração ilegal na fronteira com a Turquia

The Greek government plans to build a wall along its 206-km-long land border with Turkey to help keep out unwanted migrants on the model of the US border with Mexico.
Greek junior minister for citizen protection, Christos Papoutsis, a former EU commissioner for energy, made the announcement in an interview with the Athens News Agency on Friday (31 December), saying: "Co-operation with other EU states is going well. Now we plan to construct a fence to deal with illegal migration."
"The Greek society has reached its limits in taking in illegal immigrants ... We are absolutely determined on this issue. Additionally, we want to provide a decisive blow against the migrant smuggling rings that trade in people and their hopes for a better life," he added.
Mr Papoutsis compared the planned construction to the 1,050-km-long fence running through sections of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas on the Mexico-US border.
Built at a cost of €1.8 billion over the past five years and backed-up by cameras, radar surveillance, jeep-mounted patrols and predator drones, the 4.5-metre-high metal wall initially raised howls of protest on humanitarian and environmental grounds, but has since gained widespread public support in the US. [...]

Ver notícia no EUObserver

Irritação da Turquia sobre o pacto Chipre-Israel

Turkish authorities yesterday warned that a bilateral economic deal between Cyprus and Israel aimed at mutual prospecting for oil in the eastern Mediterranean could strain ongoing United Nations-mediated talks aimed at reunifying the divided island.
According to Turkey’s semiofficial Anatolia news agency, the Turkish Foreign Ministry’s undersecretary, Feridun Sinirlioglu, warned Gaby Levy, Israel’s ambassador to Turkey, that the deal would have a negative impact. Sinirlioglu argued that “such unilateral moves [on behalf of the Greek Cypriots] that ignore the will of the Turkish-Cypriot side will harm ongoing settlement talks on the island.”
Meanwhile, diplomatic sources told Kathimerini that Ankara aims to pressure Israel into breaking its pact with Cyprus. The sources said Ankara may use its ties with Lebanon and militant Shiite movement Hezbollah as a way of exerting pressure on Israel. Nicosia has made similar deals with Lebanon and Egypt, which Turkey also has urged the Arab nations to break.
Israel yesterday defended its decision. “This agreement is an issue between Israel and Cyprus and it in no way affects a third country,” Israel’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor was quoted as saying by Agence France-Presse. “We do not see how a third country would have anything to say about it,” he added. Another unidentified Israeli official accused Turkey of “monstrous chutzpah” for using “as an argument its occupation of the northern part of Cyprus to denounce the deal.”
The agreement defines the sea border between Cyprus and Israel and delineates an exclusive economic zone between the two countries, allowing them to prospect for oil together. Already the discovery of a huge gas deposit off the Israeli port of Haifa, and close to Cyprus, has fueled great interest in the region’s potential.

Ver notícia no Kathimerini

Leituras na revista Limes: o regresso do sultão à Turquia

Imagens do ‘pacifismo‘ dos activistas do Mavi Marmara publicadas pelo jornal turco Hürriyet

Turkey's highest circulating newspaper Hurriyet on Sunday released photos of Israeli navy commandos who had been embroiled in the clash aboard the Gaza-bound Turkish aid ship Mavi Marmara last week.

The Israel Defense Forces released a video depicting the activists aboard the ship attacking the navy commandos. The activists argued that they had been attacked first. Nine activists were killed in the melee, and dozens, including Israeli soldiers, were hurt.

The photos published by Hurriyet on Sunday, under the headline "tears of a commando", Israeli soldiers are seen beaten and bleeding, being carried below deck by Turkish activists.

In the accompanying article, the paper reported that the photos had been censored and deleted by Israeli fighters aiming to prevent embarrassment for Israel and the IDF, but the activists were able to restore them. The paper further reported that in some of the photos, activists belonging to the IHH organization are seen caring for the wounded soldiers. [...]

Ver notícia no Haaretz

‘A Turquia na encruzilhada‘ in ABC

Deesde hace unos meses, el Gobierno de Ankara ha emprendido una lenta pero clara orientación hacia una nueva política exterior. De los dos componentes de la idiosincrasia turca, Oriente y Occidente, el jefe del Gobierno, el islamista Tayip Erdogan, ha escogido el primero y, mezclándolo con el fuerte espíritu nacionalista del país, está llevando a Turquía hacia posiciones no solo alejadas de la sintonía de la Unión Europea o Estados Unidos, sino en ocasiones claramente contrarias. El trágico episodio de la flotilla apresada por la Marina israelí es el último de estos ejemplos. No es posible pensar que una operación como la que han llevado a cabo las organizaciones pretendidamente humanitarias bajo bandera turca pudiera haberse gestado sin la connivencia de las autoridades de Ankara. La reacción popular que ha producido este hecho puede ser perfectamente comprensible, pero en los hechos ha destruido los lazos estratégicos que existían entre Turquía -miembro fundador de la OTAN- y el principal aliado de Occidente en Oriente Medio, Israel, ya maltrechos tras la furibunda espantada de Erdogan en el foro de Davos.
En este sentido, los esfuerzos de acercamiento hacia el régimen iraní -Turquía nunca puso ninguna pega a la fraudulenta elección de Ahmadineyad ni a la brutal represión que siguió a aquellos comicios- han sido contraproducentes para detener los planes nucleares del régimen teocrático. La fotografía de Ahmadineyad junto a Erdogán y el brasileño Lula alzando los brazos en señal de triunfo ha reducido, prácticamente a la nada, todo el trabajo para un reforzamiento de las sanciones en el Consejo de Seguridad.
Es cierto que Turquía es un gran país, con un pasado imperial que no puede ignorarse. Como nación independiente tiene todo el derecho a elegir sus prioridades en política exterior, pero como aspirante a unirse a la familia europea no debe ignorar que hay valores e intereses que no puede permitirse el lujo de omitir. Si su objetivo es convertirse en una potencia regional a la sombra de su pasado otomano, deberá elegir entre cuál de sus dos esencias prefiere: hacia Europa o hacia el pasado.

http://www.abc.es/20100602/opinion-editorial/turquia-encrucijada-20100602.html

O assalto israelita a uma estranha operação humanitária

‘Uma resposta exagerada: Israel cai na armadilha‘ in Der Spiegel

The pro-Palestinian organizers had described the fleet with which they had hoped to break through the Israeli sea blockade of the Gaza Strip on Monday morning as a "humanitarian aid convoy." But as the Israeli army stormed the largest ship, the Mavi Marmara, the activists they encountered were in no way exclusively docile peaceniks. Some of the "peace activists" received the Israelis with crow bars and sling shots. Some of the self-professed

"human rights activists" reportedly even tore the weapons from soldiers and began to shoot.

That's not what a peaceful protest looks like.

But the reaction from Israel, a state which proclaims to adhere to the rule of law, was far from appropriate. Regardless how prepared to engage in violence the organizers of the ship convoy might have been: With at least 15 dead, all on the side of the activists, and more than 30 injured, some seriously, one thing is certain: Israel carelessly threw one of the most important principles of the application of military violence overboard: the proportionality of military force. [...]

Ver comentário completo no Der Spiegel

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,697834,00.html

A Turquia quer projectar os seus interesses na Europa através da diáspora in Der Spiegel

Leaders of Turkish descent across Europe recently received an invitation to a fancy event in Istanbul, all expenses paid. But what sounded innocent enough appears to have been an attempt by Ankara to get members of the Turkish diaspora to represent Turkish interests abroad. Turkish-German politicians have reacted angrily to the brazen lobbying.

The invitation that numerous Turkish-German politicians received in February sounded enticing: Lunch in a five-star hotel in Istanbul, travel expenses included. The session was titled: "Wherever One of Our Compatriots Is, We Are There Too."

Around 1,500 people of Turkish descent from several European countries accepted the tempting offer. Among the speakers at the event, which took place at the end of February, were businesspeople, NGO representatives and a member of the Belgian parliament of Turkish descent. But the meeting, which has sparked outrage among Turkish-German politicians, was more than a harmless gathering of the Turkish diaspora.

The event was organized by the Turkish government, which is led by the conservative-religious Justice and Development (AKP) party, in an attempt to send a clear message to the participants that they should represent Turkey in other countries. Turks living abroad should take the citizenship of their new home country -- not, however, with the intention of becoming an integrated part of that society, but so they can become politically active, said Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who spoke at the event. Erdogan also compared Islamophobia with anti-Semitism in his speech and said that countries which oppose dual citizenship are violating people's fundamental rights. (Germany, for example, generally does not allow its citizens to hold dual nationality.)

'Crime Against Humanity'

Participants in the session told SPIEGEL ONLINE that the Turkish prime minister then repeated a sentence which had already sparked fierce criticism when he said it during a 2008 speech in Cologne: "Assimilation is a crime against humanity." And even stronger language was apparently used by one representative of the Turkish government. According to Ali Ertan Toprak, the vice chairman of the Alevi community in Germany, who was present at the lunch, one speaker went so far as to say: "We need to inoculate European culture with Turkish culture."

The language in the invitiations already suggested the attitude of the Turkish government toward Turkish-German politicians. Ankara perceives them as being its own. Invitations sent in the name of Turkish Labor Minister Faruk Celik to German Bundestag members were addressed as "my esteemed members of parliament" and Erdogan was referred to as "our prime minister."

Turkish-German politicians and religious representatives in Germany are now voicing sharp criticism of Ankara. "It was very clearly a lobbying event on the part of the Turkish government," said Toprak. He said that he himself was shocked about how openly the Turkish government had expressed its view that Germans of Turkish descent should represent Turkey's interests. "If members of the (conservative) Christian Democratic Union who oppose EU membership for Turkey had been there, they would have got a lot of material for their arguments," Toprak says.

Highly Problematic

Canan Bayram, a member of the Berlin state parliament, said she only attended the meeting because, as an integration spokeswoman for the Green Party in the city, she felt she needed to see what an event like this was like. Of course she covered her own travel and accommodation expenses, she said. "It was important to me that I make it clear that, as a member of a German state parliament, I do not allow the Turkish government to pay my expenses." Sirvan Cakici, a member of the Bremen state parliament for the Left Party who attended the Istanbul meeting, also emphasized that she paid for her expenses herself.

"The Turkish government should pay more attention to the interests of Turks in Turkey, rather than trying to exploit Turkish-Germans as their ambassadors," said Vural Öger, a former member of the European Parliament who was also at the lunch.

Other Turkish-German politicians turned down the invitation because they saw it as highly problematic right from the beginning. "It was clear that this was purely a lobbying event on the part of the Turkish government. As a German politician, I did not belong there," says Özcan Mutlu, a member of the Berlin state parliament for the Greens. "We are not an extended arm of the Turkish government." Memet Kilic, a member of the federal parliament with the Green Party, also declined to take part for similar reasons.

'Unacceptable'

It is not, in fact, the first time that the Turkish government has sought contact to Turkish-German politicians. After the 2009 parliamentary elections, Turkish-German Bundestag members received congratulatory calls from the AKP government. And in October 2009, the Turkish government invited German parliamentarians to an AKP party congress in Ankara.

Ekin Deligöz, a member of the Bundestag for the Greens, says she has in the past received numerous invitations from the Turkish government, which she has turned down out of principle. "I refuse to represent the interests of the Turkish government simply because I was born in Turkey."

Turkish-German politicians feel that, in principle, it is acceptable if the Turkish government tries to seek contact with Bundestag members of Turkish descent. "After all, we act as a kind of bridge," says Kilic. "It's the most normal thing in the world." He adds that it is "unacceptable," however, if Ankara openly says that politicians of Turkish descent should act as a mouthpiece for Turkish interests.

Sevim Dagdelen, a Bundestag member for the Left Party who turned down the invitation to attend the February event, talks of a "parallel foreign policy" on the part of the Turkish government. "I don't want to be part of it," she says. "I find it regrettable and cause for concern that other German politicians are apparently taking part."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,druck-684125,00.html

‘A Suécia vai reconhecer o genocídio arménio‘ in The Local

Though the motion to recognize the genocide of Armenians and other ethnic groups - Chaldeans, Syrians, Assyrians and Pontian Greeks - had the backing of members of five of the seven Swedish parliamentary parties, the vote's outcome was uncertain to the last as the parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs had recommended its rejection.

But with four centre-right politicians ignoring the recommendation and choosing to vote with the opposition, the resolution was eventually passed by a single vote.

Turkey immediately elected to recall its ambassador to Sweden, Zergün Korutürk, who said she was "very, very disappointed" by the vote.

"I'm disappointed and somewhat surprised because I expected the parliament to adopt the normal position that it is not the job of parliamentarians to decide whether or not a genocide has taken place.

"That is a questions for historians, and for researchers to examine before reaching a conclusion," she told news agency TT.

Zergün Korutürk added that Sweden and Turkey had enjoyed excellent relations over the last decade but that this was now certain to change.

"Everything is going to regress. This is going to have a drastic impact on our bilateral relations," she said.

Speaking to The Local prior to the vote, Left Party foreign policy spokesperson Hans Linde expressed his view that the time had come for Sweden to take a stand on the issue.

"Firstly, to hinder any repeat and to learn from history. Secondly, to encourage the development of democracy in Turkey - which includes dealing with their own history. Thirdly, to redress the wrongs committed against the victims and their descendants," Linde said.

The foreign affairs committee, in its comments on the motion, had argued for an open debate on the issue. It also stated that the persecution of the Armenians and other ethnic groups in 1915 would have constituted genocide according to the definition adopted by the United Nations in its 1948 genocide convention if it "had it been in force at the time."

But the committee stated that it does not consider it parliament's role to rule on human rights issues and that this should instead be addressed by "open research, open access to facts, and free debate."

Sweden's Minister of Foreign Affairs Carl Bildt agreed with the committee's position in comments on his blog on Thursday. Under the heading "Don't politicize history," Bildt wrote:

"A politicizing of history in this way risks undermining ongoing reconciliation processes, plays into the hands of those opposing normality in Armenia and reform in Turkey... and creating new tension in Swedish society."

The committee concluded in its comments that the Turkish government has in recent years made some movement on the issue, with conferences arranged on the subject as well as broader media debate.

The Swedish parliament has voted on the issue before, even approving a report in 2000 recognizing the disappearance of as many as 2.5 million Armenians, Chaldeans, Syrians, Assyrians and Pontian Greeks from April 1915 as genocide. But the recognition was later withdrawn "on a technicality", Hans Linde told The Local.

"The parliament also voted against recognition (by 245 to 37) in 2008. The difference this time is that the Social Democrats have changed their position," he said.

Carl Bildt claimed in his statement that the Social Democrat parliamentary group was forced to change standpoint on the issue as a result of a party congress vote, arguing that there are "several that feel deep unease over this."

According to Sweden's Living History Forum, most researchers are now in agreement that the massacres constituted genocide according to the accepted 1948 UN definition. The exception to this is Turkish researchers. The Turkish government has never recognized the events as a genocide and it is illegal in Turkey to claim that it occurred.

The Living History Forum is a Swedish public authority which works with issues on tolerance, democracy and human rights from both a national and international perspective.

The Local has made attempts to contact the foreign policy spokespersons at the Centre and Liberal (Folkpartiet) parties for a comment.

http://www.thelocal.se/25468/20100311/

‘Comissão do Congresso dos EUA reconhece o genocídio arménio‘ in BBC

A US congressional panel has described the killing of Armenians by Turkish forces during World War I as genocide, despite White House objections.

The resolution was narrowly approved by the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Turkey, a key US ally, responded by recalling its ambassador in Washington for consultations. It has fiercely opposed the non-binding resolution.

The White House had warned that the vote would harm reconciliation talks between Turkey and Armenia.

The resolution calls on President Barack Obama to ensure that US foreign policy reflects an understanding of the "genocide" and to label the World War I killings as such in his annual statement on the issue.

It was approved by 23 votes to 22 by the committee.

Within minutes the Turkish government issued a statement condemning "this resolution which accuses the Turkish nation of a crime it has not committed".

The statement also said the Turkish ambassador was being recalled for consultations.

A Turkish parliamentary delegation had gone to Washington to try to persuade committee members to reject the resolution.

'Too important'

In 2007, a similar resolution passed the committee stage, but was shelved before a House vote after pressure from the George W Bush administration.

During his election campaign Mr Obama promised to brand the mass killings genocide.

Before the vote, committee chairman Howard Berman urged fellow members of the committee to endorse the resolution.

"I believe that Turkey values its relationship with the United States at least as much as we value our relations with Turkey," he said.

The Turks, he added, "fundamentally agree that the US-Turkish alliance is simply too important to get side-tracked by a non-binding resolution passed by the House of Representatives".

In October last year, Turkey and Armenia signed a historic accord normalising relations between them after a century of hostility.

Armenia wants Turkey to recognise the killings as an act of genocide, but successive Turkish governments have refused to do so.

Hundreds of thousands of Armenians died in 1915, when they were deported en masse from eastern Anatolia by the Ottoman Empire. They were killed by troops or died from starvation and disease.

Armenians have campaigned for the killings to be recognised internationally as genocide - and more than 20 countries have done so.

Turkish officials accept that atrocities were committed but argue they were part of the war and that there was no systematic attempt to destroy the Christian Armenian people.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8550765.stm

‘A república do medo na Turquia‘ in Wall Street Journal

por Soner Cagaptay

Last week's arrests in Turkey of dozens of high-ranking military officers mark the country's latest step toward authoritarianism. Neither Europe nor the United States can afford to ignore Turkey's transformation.

Since coming to power in 2002, the ruling Islamist Justice and Development Party (AKP) and ultra-conservative Fethullah Gulen Movement have gained significant leverage over the police and media. Emulating Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, the AKP has made selective use of the legal code to effectively silence the country's two largest independent media groups.

Dogan, which owns about half of the media outlets in the country, faces a record $3.5 billion fine on delayed tax payments. Liberal media mogul Mehmet Emin Karamehmet has been sentenced to 12 years in jail on charges related to dealings at his bank for which he was earlier acquitted. Editors now think twice before running stories critical of the government.

Until recently, the judiciary and the military were able to keep government excesses in check. That apparent equilibrium between Islamists and secularists was shattered a few weeks ago, when Gulenist papers published a 5,000-page memo allegedly written by military officers planning a coup.

U.S. diplomats I have talked to and Turkish analysts say that if the military really had planned to overthrow the government, it would have hardly written it down in a detailed 5,000 page document. The idea that the military would bomb Istanbul's historic mosques and shoot down its own planes to precipitate such a coup—as the alleged memo describes—is simply outlandish. The military denies any plans for toppling the government and says much of the document is actually taken from a 2003 war game exercise. It says that the incriminating elements detailing the alleged coup were added to the document.

For the past two years, the Turkish military has been the target of illegal wiretaps and accusations that it is plotting against the government. The question is whether the military will tolerate the assault or strike back, as it has done in the past when it thought the secular nature of the state was threatened.

The Islamist government has also targeted Turkey's other secular bastion—the judiciary. Last month, a Gulenist prosecutor arrested a secular prosecutor in Erzincan. He was officially charged with belonging to an ultranationalist gang known as Ergenekon, which the Gulenists and AKP claim is trying to overthrow the government. Whether that's true or not, there is no doubt the arrest solved a lot of problems for the government. Before his arrest, the Erzincan prosecutor was investigating alleged connections between Gulenist fund raising and Chechen and Hamas terrorists. He was also looking into the armed activities of Ismailaga, a radical Islamist movement.

The Gulenists and the AKP are further targeting the courts by appointing a disproportionate number of Gulenist jurists, thus eroding the secular nature of the judiciary. And the courts seem to have been wiretapped as well. According to media reports, the police have bugged over 130 top judges and prosecutors, as well as the high court of appeals. This is not that hard to believe, given that the justice minister admitted in 2009 that the police have wiretapped 70,000 people.

What is the way forward for Turkey? A military coup isn't the answer and a court ban against the AKP would likely backfire, boosting the party's popularity. The next general elections are scheduled for 2011, but by that time the cards might be stacked too much in favor of the governing parties. That's why the West should press for elections that are free and democratic. The next elections won't be fair if the Turkish media are not independent and if Turks fear that they live in a police state that wiretaps its judiciary and citizens.

Hoping to win Ankara's support for tougher Iran sanctions and more troops in Afghanistan, the U.S. and Europe have so far been hesitant to criticize the AKP-led government. The "pragmatists" fail to realize that an illiberal and Islamist Turkey will be increasingly opposed to Western policies.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704187204575101820058883004.html

‘O jogo duplo da Turquia na segurança energética da UE‘ in EUObserver

Turkey has agreed to grant access to Russia's South Stream gas pipeline through its part of the Black Sea, in a move which could hurt the prospects of an EU-backed project to reduce Russian energy dependency.

The Turkish deal is a major breakthrough for the Russian pipeline, which has to cross the maritime economic areas of either Turkey or Ukraine, but with Ukraine very unlikely to give consent.

At a signing ceremony in Ankara on Thursday (6 August), Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin and his Turkish counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, insisted that South Stream is not a rival to the EU-backed Nabucco pipeline project.

"Even with the construction of South Stream, Nabucco will not be closed," Mr Putin said at a news conference. "The more infrastructure projects, the better, because that will create reliability and stability of energy supply to Europe."

The European Commission also officially rejects the idea the two projects are in competition.

"We consider [South Stream] a complementary initiative to our ongoing Nabucco efforts," commission spokesman Martin Selmayr said at a press briefing in Brussels.

South Stream is designed to bring more Russian gas under the Black Sea to Bulgaria and Italy. Nabucco is to bring gas from Caspian Sea area countries to Europe via Turkey, bypassing Russia.

Experts warn that if South Stream is built the EU will be forced to buy Caspian gas at a much higher price, however.

"I argue that if South Stream is built, Nabucco will not be, at least not for Caspian gas," Zeyno Baran, a Turkish-American energy expert with the Washington-based Hudson Institute, told Euobserver.

"If South Stream is built, all that Caspian gas is going to pour into it. Nabucco is important not only for diversifying Europe's needs, but it's also freeing the Central Asian countries and the Caucasian countries from the hold of Russia. Now with this, Turkey sent a signal, whether it to wanted or not, that it doesn't really care about those countries, it just cares about becoming a gas hub."

Turkey just last month signed a legal framework agreement for Nabucco, raising hopes of the country's strategic backing of EU energy security interests.

"Europeans need to really understand what's going on in Turkey, how close it has gotten to Russia as opposed to Europe and the US," Ms Baran said.

In terms of geopolitical impact, South Stream would reduce the importance of Ukraine's transit pipeline network, which currently ships 80 percent of Russian gas to the EU.

The new situation would make it easier for Moscow to exert political pressure on Kiev by raising the price of its gas exports to Ukraine without the fear of a potential knock-on effect on its EU customers.

If South Stream is built before Nabucco, it could also see Azerbaijan sell its extra gas into the Russian pipeline, damaging prospects for Georgia's independence.

Georgia currently buys all its gas from Azerbaijan, with the country being forced to go back to Russian suppliers if its Azeri channels were blocked.

In a parallel development highlighting Russia's attitude to the energy sector, Mr Putin on Thursday also signed an executive order definitively rejecting the country's participation in the Energy Charter Treaty.

The 1991 multilateral agreement is designed to help EU companies invest in Russian energy firms and to grant access to Russia's vast pipeline system, effectively breaking its monopoly on Caspian zone exports.

http://euobserver.com/9/28530?print=1

JPTF 2009/08/10

‘Vitória dos nacionalistas no Norte de Chipre obscurece esperanças de reunificação‘ in The Economist

The prospects of a united Cyprus receded when a nationalist party won the parliamentary election in the north on April 19th. The National Unity Party, led by the hawkish Dervish Eroglu, took 44% of the vote, giving it 26 of the 50 seats. The vote for the ruling Republican Turkish Party, which backs reunification, fell to 29%. This reflects voters’ disillusion over the UN-sponsored peace talks that have dragged on since Turkish troops seized the northern third of the island in 1974 after a failed attempt by ultra-nationalist Greek-Cypriots to unite with Greece.

The result will also damage Turkey’s faltering membership talks with the European Union. Turkey faces a December deadline to open air- and seaports to Greek-Cypriots. It refuses to do so until the EU eases trade restrictions on northern Cyprus. Sweden, which takes on the EU’s presidency in July, is looking for a way to avert yet another train-wreck between Turkey and the EU. One idea is for Turkey to open a symbolic port or two only (though this was also tried two years ago by the Finnish EU presidency).

Hopes of a breakthrough now hinge on talks between the Greek-Cypriot president, Demetris Christofias, and his Turkish-Cypriot counterpart, Mehmet Ali Talat. Mr Talat led the campaign to persuade Turkish-Cypriots to vote in favour of the UN’s Annan plan to reunite the island in 2004. But the Greek-Cypriots overwhelmingly rejected the plan in a separate vote, so Cyprus joined the EU as a divided island. The Greek-Cypriots have been subverting Turkey’s EU membership talks ever since.

The mood improved markedly when Mr Christofias, who like his fellow left-winger, Mr Talat, favours a settlement, was elected president in February 2008. Substantive peace talks began last year with the backing of Turkey’s government, still keen on a settlement similar to that proposed in the Annan plan. This calls for the establishment of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation between Greeks and Turks.

Mr Eroglu publicly espouses the idea of reunification, saying that talks between Mr Talat and Mr Christofias must continue. Yet many suspect he prefers the status quo, which means continued dependence on Turkey and keeping 30,000 Turkish troops. Mr Eroglu talks of sending “a representative” to the peace talks. If he sticks to his campaign pledge to scrap a commission set up under Mr Talat to return occupied properties to Greek-Cypriots, the talks may collapse altogether.

Despite all this, Mr Talat met Mr Christofias again on April 21st. In a show of support, Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, made clear that he would not tolerate mischief-making by Mr Eroglu. “We will not be supporting any steps that will weaken the hand of the president,” Mr Erdogan insisted. Some fret that Mr Erdogan may yet yield to hawks in his own party. Another worry is whether Turkey’s generals really want a deal.

What is clear is that the EU complicated matters hugely by letting a divided Cyprus join. “Had [the EU] been less rigid and cleverer, it would have lifted the sanctions long ago and thereby minimised the dependency of northern Cyprus on Ankara,” argues Yavuz Baydar, a commentator. It would also have eased Turkey’s accession to the EU. But that is just what Turkey’s detractors inside the EU do not want.

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=13527550
JPTF 2009/04/28

‘A candidatura turca divide Barack Obama e Nicolas Sarkozy‘ in France 24h

Le président Nicolas Sarkozy a réaffirmé dimanche sur TF1 son hostilité à une entrée de la Turquie dans l'Union européenne, après le soutien apporté par le président américain Barack Obama à une telle adhésion.

"Je travaille main dans la main avec le président Obama, mais s'agissant de l'Union européenne, c'est aux pays membres de l'Union européenne de décider", a déclaré M. Sarkozy, interrogé sur la déclaration de son homologue, en duplex depuis Prague où il participe au sommet UE-Etats-Unis.

"J'ai toujours été opposé à cette entrée et je le reste. Je crois pouvoir dire qu'une immense majorité des Etats membres (de l'UE) est sur la position de la France", a-t-il ajouté.

"La Turquie, c'est un très grand pays allié de l'Europe et allié des Etats-Unis. Elle doit rester un partenaire privilégié, ma position n'a pas changé", a déclaré le chef de l'Etat.

M. Obama avait estimé un peu plus tôt devant les dirigeants de l'UE à Prague que l'entrée de la Turquie dans l'Union européenne "constituerait un signal important" envoyé à ce pays musulman.

Les pourparlers d'adhésion de la Turquie au bloc européen, entamés en octobre 2005, marquent actuellement le pas. Certains pays comme la France ou l'Allemagne sont opposés à la perspective de voir ce pays entrer dans l'UE et privilégient une association étroite avec lui.

Les Etats-Unis et le Royaume-Uni, en revanche, militent depuis longtemps pour une adhésion.

Vendredi et samedi, au sommet de l'Otan à Strasbourg/Kehl/Baden Baden, la Turquie s'était opposée à la nomination du Premier ministre danois, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, au poste de secrétaire général de l'Alliance avant de s'y ranger. Le Premier ministre turc, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, avait indiqué samedi que ce revirement suivait le fait que le président Obama se fût porté "garant" d'un certain nombre d'engagements, qu'il n'a pas précisés.

La désignation de M. Rasmussen, "posait des problèmes à nos amis turcs, parce qu'il y avait l'histoire des terroristes kurdes avec le PKK et puis l'histoire des caricatures (de Mahomet NDLR). Mais nous nous étions déterminés à ne pas céder parce que M. Rasmussen est un homme démocratique, un homme de grande qualité", a dit M. Sarkozy.

Interrogé sur d'éventuelles concessions, il a répondu qu'il "a fallu convaincre nos amis turcs de notre fermeté. Le président Obama a joué un rôle considérable, s'est montré comme un vrai leader, et à la sortie, à l'unanimité, on a décidé que ce serait Rasmussen".

La Turquie reprochait au candidat son soutien à un journal danois qui avait publié des caricatures de Mahomet en 2005 et son refus de fermer la chaîne de télévision Roj TV, considérée par Ankara comme porte-voix des rebelles kurdes du Parti des travailleurs du Kurdistan (PKK).

Selon plusieurs journaux turcs, Ankara a obtenu l'assurance que Roj TV sera prochainement interdite d'émettre depuis le Danemark, que M. Rasmussen allait adresser "un message positif" sur l'affaire des caricatures, ainsi que la désignation de responsable turcs à des postes clés de l'Otan.

http://www.france24.com/fr/20090405-turquie-adhesion-union-europeenne-barack-obama-nicolas-sarkozy-opposition-hostilite-tf1-discours
JPTF 2009/04/14