"Erdoğan: É a Turquia e não os EUA quem decide atacar o PKK" in Zaman, 26 de Outubro de 2007

Ankara will not be influenced by US concerns when deciding whether to launch an incursion into northern Iraq to destroy bases of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) there, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said on Thursday in Bucharest.

Meanwhile, a senior US official in Ankara on the same day said that Washington is working with Turkish and Iraqi authorities to free eight Turkish soldiers held hostage by the PKK.

Responding to questions from reporters during a visit to the Romanian capital, Erdoğan said he wanted the United States to act with Turkey, a NATO ally, against the PKK, without elaborating whether this meant a joint military operation. “Right now, as a strategic ally, the US is in a position to support us. We have supported them in Afghanistan,” he said.

Erdoğan noted that US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was welcome to voice hopes that Turkey would not overstep its border in its fight against the PKK.

But he added, “But any decision on the necessity of such an incursion belongs to us,” underlining that Ankara would have no hesitation in launching an attack against PKK bases in northern Iraq if the situation demanded it.

The prime minister drew a comparison to the US-led military intervention in Iraq. “Are people not asking themselves what the Americans are doing in Iraq, 10,000 kilometers from home?”

“I’m bothered [by the PKK]. What are the Americans bothered about in Iraq?” Erdoğan questioned. “Our security forces are determined to move as soon as the need arises. Our target is the terrorist organization, the PKK, not civilians or the entire territory of Iraq, he told a joint news conference with Romanian Premier Calin Popescu-Tariceanu.

Erdoğan also stressed that he thought that the Iraqis “won’t continue to shelter this organization which has found refuge in northern Iraq.”

Turkish nationalist opposition parties have accused Erdoğan and his government of being too soft on terrorism and of being swayed by US pressure not to send troops into Iraq. Anti-US sentiment has soared in Turkey over the past few years due to Washington’s refusal to crack down on the PKK, which uses northern Iraq as a launching pad for attacks on Turkish targets, despite the fact that the PKK is listed as a terrorist organization by the US capital and likewise a large majority of the international community.

In Washington, the US State Department said on Wednesday that Rice will visit Turkey next week in a new diplomatic push to reduce tensions between Turkey and Iraq over the PKK. Rice will be in Turkey on Nov. 2-3 for meetings with President Abdullah Gül and Erdoğan, said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.

Rice told US legislators she had appealed for restraint from Turkey but stressed it was Iraq’s responsibility to prevent PKK terrorists from using northern Iraq as a springboard for attacks into Turkey. “We have said to the Turks that a major incursion into Iraq is only going to cause further instability. What we have encouraged is joint work [between Turkey and Iraq],” Rice said.

After her visit to Ankara for meetings with government leaders, Rice is set to travel to Istanbul for a ministerial conference on Iraq, attended by Iraq’s neighbors as well as major powers.

Turkey, which has NATO’s second biggest army, has amassed close to 100,000 troops along its mountainous border with Iraq, backed up by tanks, artillery, warplanes and helicopters, for a possible large-scale incursion.

Speaking on the sidelines of a meeting of NATO defense ministers on Wednesday, Pentagon chief Robert Gates has said he saw little sense in air strikes or major ground assaults by US, Turkish or other forces against the PKK in northern Iraq until more is known about their locations along the border.

“Without good intelligence, just sending large numbers of troops across the border [from Turkey] or dropping bombs doesn’t seem to make much sense to me,” Gates said, when asked to assess the prospects of the US military launching air strikes in support of Turkey’s efforts against the PKK. The defense secretary was questioned about whether his sense of the limitations on effective military action applied to the US as well as Turkish strikes. “For anybody,” he answered.

An Iraqi delegation led by Defense Minister Abdel Qader Mohammed Jassim arrived in Ankara on Thursday afternoon seeking to avert a Turkish military incursion. Turkish officials described the talks as “final chance” for a diplomatic solution. The eight-member delegation included Iraq’s intelligence chief and senior officials from the Iraqi interior and foreign ministries. It also included two representatives of the two major Iraqi Kurdish parties in northern Iraq. US ambassador in Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, said diplomats at the US Embassy also joined the Iraqi delegation but did not say which members of the embassy staff were dispatched to Ankara.

US says working to free hostage Turkish soldiers

In Ankara, a senior US official said on Thursday that the United States is “doing what it can” to obtain the release of eight Turkish troops captured Sunday by the PKK after an ambush in which 12 other soldiers were killed.

“My government is appalled by the recent attack. We are doing what we can, working with the Turkish government and the Iraqi government to make sure that the remaining hostages are freed,” Matthew Bryza, the deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, said in a speech delivered at a top-level gathering of the 12-member Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) hosted in Ankara by term president Turkey.

“We’ve made a whole series of commitments on eliminating the PKK terrorist threat. We mean it. We’ll deliver on those promises. We are working on it ... with the Turkish government and the Iraqi government,” Bryza said. “We know we need to produce concrete results,” he added.
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=125600
JPTF 2007/10/26

"Extremistas turcos semeiam a confusão em Bruxelas" in Courrier International, 25 de Outubro de 2007

Environ 600 Turcs, qui s'étaient passé le mot par SMS, ont violemment manifesté, le mercredi 24 octobre, dans les rues de Bruxelles. "Une manifestation pour laquelle aucune autorisation n'avait été demandée et qui s'inscrit dans le contexte du conflit entre la Turquie et l'Irak à propos du Parti des travailleurs du Kurdistan (PKK) ainsi que dans des relents de rejet à l'égard des Arméniens", rapporte La Libre Belgique, qui pointe l'activisme des Loups gris, la principale mouvance turque d'extrême droite. Des groupes, "très mobiles, attiraient les policiers dans telle rue, tel carrefour, devant un lieu arménien ou kurde, en incendiant un conteneur ou une voiture, puis refluaient à l'approche des pelotons, parfois sous les jets à haute pression des arroseuses", raconte le quotidien. Bilan : quelques blessés, dont des policiers, des dégradations et une centaine d'arrestations. Dimanche, déjà, plusieurs dizaines de manifestants s'en étaient pris à des lieux arméniens et kurdes, à l'ambassade des Etats-Unis et à un journaliste indépendant d'origine turque, Mehmet Koksal, qui est également le correspondant de Courrier international en Belgique. Il livre ici son témoignage.

Mehmet Koksal, que s'est-il passé dimanche ?

Dès la fin de la semaine dernière, il y eut une campagne en Turquie pour les soldats "martyrs", tués dans des combats avec le PKK. Cette campagne a été suivie par les médias turcs en Belgique. Les radios ont remplacé les émissions de divertissement par des émissions spéciales en hommage aux "martyrs", les sites internet ont lancé des appels à la mobilisation. Il serait naïf de croire que tout cela est spontané.

Dimanche, j'ai reçu un appel me prévenant d'une manifestation à Bruxelles, je suis allé voir. Comme je le raconte sur mon blog (allochtone.be), les manifestants ont arraché un drapeau devant l'ambassade américaine et certains se sont mis à crier : "Yak, yak !", ce qui veut dire "Brûle, brûle !" Et pendant que je prends des notes, un manifestant me reconnaît et m'insulte. Je suis connu comme quelqu'un qui n'aime pas les nationalistes turcs. Je suis considéré comme un traître, notamment parce que je me suis prononcé pour la reconnaissance du génocide arménien et que j'ai critiqué le double discours des élus d'origine turque en Belgique. Je collabore à plusieurs médias, La Tribune de Bruxelles, Point critique, une revue de l'Union des progressistes juifs de Belgique, Resistances.be, et mon blog est très lu par les journalistes et les politiques. Une vingtaine de personnes m'ont sauté dessus, m'ont frappé à coups de poing et à coups de pied. Un manifestant a fini par me tirer de là en me disant : "Casse-toi", puis des policiers m'ont mis dans une voiture banalisée et m'ont laissé devant le Parlement, un peu plus loin.

Quelles sont les réactions en Belgique ?

Pour ce qui est de la manifestation, la presse belge a fait des comptes rendus, et les manifestants ont continué leur campagne sur Internet. L'ambassadeur de Turquie a publié un communiqué appelant les jeunes à ne pas céder à la provocation. C'est bizarre, ce sont plutôt eux qui font de la provocation, c'est une autre lecture des faits. Mais je n'ai jamais entendu l'ambasssadeur condamner ce genre d'acte.

En ce qui me concerne, l'Association des journalistes professionnels (AJP) a publié un communiqué dénonçant la non-assistance à personne en danger de la part des services de police. Quand j'ai commencé à être agressé, j'ai demandé à des policiers de m'ouvrir la porte d'une de leurs voitures, mais ils ne l'ont pas fait. Plus par peur, je pense, que par manque de volonté. Aujourd'hui, Reporters sans frontières a également publié un communiqué. Je reçois des menaces, sur des sites Internet de Turcs de Belgique, sur mon e-mail aussi. Il y a des insultes et des commentaires agressifs sur mon blog. Ils font monter la pression, mais je ne suis pas du tout impressionné. Je suis plus inquiet pour mon entourage.
http://www.courrierinternational.com/article.asp?obj_id=79118
JPTF 2007/10/25

Jogos de Guerra 5 - Turquia: "Alá quer esta guerra" in Der Spiegel online, 23 de Outubro

The mood in Turkey is becoming increasingly jingoistic as thousands take to the streets, calling for war against the Kurdish rebel organization PKK and an invasion of northern Iraq. But Baghdad has promised to curb the Kurds.

Anger drives them on to the streets, anger provoked by the images of dead soldiers shown on Turkish television. Thousands of demonstrators walk along Istiklal Caddesi, or Independence Avenue, Istanbul's longest shopping street. They are calling for war: War against the Kurds, against the PKK, against Iraq. "We have waited long enough," reads one poster. "Allah wants this war," is the message on another.

People have been protesting throughout the country since Sunday evening, after it was revealed that rebels from the Kurdish separatist organization the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) had killed 12 Turkish soldiers in eastern Turkey. It is mainly young people who take to the streets, with Turkish flags in their hands, whistles in their mouths and hatred in their eyes.
"We have waited long enough," says Erkan, a young car mechanic from Istanbul. "It's time to strike." His face is pale and his right hand is clenched in a fist. "We are all Turks, we are all soldiers!" he calls. Many of the demonstrators sympathize with the right-wing youth organization the Gray Wolves. Their message to the Kurds is clear: Admit you are Turkish, or die.

The PKK, which has bases in the mountains of northern Iraq, has been fighting for decades for an independent Kurdistan. But the attacks of recent weeks were the heaviest in a long time. Last Wednesday, the Turkish parliament approved -- by an overwhelming majority -- a measure (more...) which clears the way for a military incursion into northern Iraq.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is still hesitating, though, not least after the personal intervention (more...) of US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. But Erdogan said Tuesday that Turkey couldn't wait indefinitely for the Iraqi government to act against the PKK. "We cannot wait forever," he said during a visit to the UK for talks with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. "We have to make our own decisions."

Brown said Britain was working with Turkey on "all efforts that are necessary so that terrorists cannot move from Iraq into Turkey." The UK, like the US, is keen to stop Turkey invading northern Iraq, fearing the destabilization of the region.
Artigo integral em http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,513071,00.html
JPTF 23/10/2007

Jogos de Guerra 3 - "A Turquia ameça invadir Iraque para atacar o PKK" in Telegraph, 22 de Outubro de 2007

Turkey is threatening to invade Iraq after Kurdish separatists killed at least 17 of its soldiers in a series of co-ordinated attacks within Turkish territory.
As many as 100,000 troops have been deployed close to the border between the two countries as President Abdullah Gul's office vowed to pay "whatever price necessary" to defeat terrorism.

Militants from the Kurdish Workers Party, the PKK, claimed to have taken several Turkish soldiers alive during the fighting and Turkey is bracing itself for a drawn-out hostage crisis.

Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said that Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, had urged Turkey to wait a few days pause before any potential response.

In a sign that Ankara still hopes for eleventh-hour assistance from Washington, Mr Erdogan said: "We expect the United States to take swift steps [against the PKK] befitting of our strategic partnership."
The United States, Turkey's staunch Nato ally, is anxious to avert any Turkish military strikes against the rebels, who attacked positions from hideouts in northern Iraq, fearing this could destabilise a relatively peaceful part of the country.

The attacks, the worst in more than a decade by the rebels, came just four days after Turkey's parliament overwhelmingly approved a motion to allow troops to enter northern Iraq to fight the guerrillas.

A statement from President Gul's office said: "While respecting the territorial integrity of Iraq, Turkey will not shy away from paying whatever price is necessary to protect its rights, its laws, its indivisible unity and its citizens."

When Vecdi Gonul, the defence minister, was asked directly if there would be a military response to the attacks, he said: "Not urgently. They [the Turkish troops] are planning a cross-border [incursion] ... We would like to do these things with the Americans."

Mr Erdogan, who is due in London this week to meet Gordon Brown, said in response to the attacks: "Our anger, our hatred is great."

The violence began when PKK militants blew up a bridge under cover of darkness on Saturday night as an army convoy was crossing it, killing at least a dozen soldiers and wounding sixteen more.

The Turkish army said it then launched a number of mopping up operations on what it believed to be PKK positions and by nightfall it claimed to have killed 32 "guerrillas".

In a separate incident a minibus carrying Kurdish civilians was hit by a roadside bomb, believed to have been planted by the PKK and seventeen people were injured, two of them seriously.

The incidents took place within a few miles of Daglica, a small Turkish town just north of the junction where Turkey's borders with Iran and Iraq meet.

The area is rugged and with high mountains providing cover for the insurgents who cross over the border from the semi-autonomous Kurdish region of Iraq where the ethnic Kurdish authorities tolerate PKK training camps and depots.

The remoteness of the site of the attack and tight Turkish security that blocks road access meant it was impossible for journalists or other sources to give independent confirmation of official accounts.

While Turkish authorities were adamant they had killed 32 PKK members, in past retaliatory operations by the army Kurdish civilians have often been caught in the cross fire.

There was also no immediate confirmation of the claims, made by a pro-Kurdish news agency based in Belgium, that several soldiers had been taken hostage.

The PKK has taken several soldiers and even a few journalists hostage since its military campaign for a Kurdish homeland in Turkey was launched in 1984 but all have been released unharmed.

Across the border in Iraq, the local authorities again denounced the PKK but, as has been seen many times in the past, they showed no sign of taking direct action against the group.

Iraq's president, Jalal Talabani, who is himself an ethnic Kurd and led a Kurdish separatist group for years in an armed struggle against Saddam Hussein, ordered the PKK to leave.

"We have appealed to the PKK to desist fighting and to transform themselves from military organisations into civilian and political ones," Mr Talabani said.

"But if they [the PKK] insist on the continuation of fighting, they should leave Kurdistan, Iraq, and not create problems here.”

The PKK appears determined to draw Turkey into cross border raids into Iraq in order to hurt Ankara's wider strategic interests.

Cross-border raids would seriously damage Ankara's links with Washington which is already struggling to stabilise Iraq post-Saddam Hussein.

And it would jeopardise Turkey's bid to join the European Union as stable borders are pre-requisite to accession.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=F0FZLRSR13HIVQFIQMGCFFWAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/10/22/wturk122.xml

Para onde vai a Turquia?

As eleições do passado domingo deram uma clara maioria absoluta ao AKP-Partido da Justiça e Desenvolvimento, do actual Primeiro-Ministro Erdogan. Este, todavia, ficou abaixo dos 2/3 de deputados necessários para eleger o Presidente da República no Parlamento (no futuro será provavelmente eleito por sufrágio universal directo) e alterar a Constituição. Contudo, um resultado desta dimensão representa também uma importante vitória do AKP, no braço de ferro com os militares e o establishment secularista. Paradoxalmente, apesar de ter passado de 34,3% dos votos nas eleições de 2002 para 46,5% nestas últimas, no novo Parlamento vai ter menos 23 deputados que no anterior (340, contra 363 em 2002)... A explicação é uma fasquia de 10% da Lei Eleitoral, a pensar nos partidos curdos, muito questionável do ponto de vista da democraticidade do sistema eleitoral, que impede formações políticas com votações inferiores de terem qualquer representação parlamentar. (Nas anteriores eleições, cerca de 45% dos votos expressos não elegeram qualquer deputado!) De forma engenhosa, o DTP-Partido da Sociedade Democrática, um partido étnico curdo, conseguiu eleger 24 deputados, tendo-se estes candidatado formalmente como independentes, contornando assim a fasquia eleitoral dos 10% (os curdos tiraram as devidas ilacções das eleições de 2002, onde com 6,2% da votação e mais de 2 milhões de votos, não elegeram qualquer deputado...). Outra nota importante vai para a reentrada do MHP-Partido da Acção Nacionalista, de Devlet Bahçeli no Parlamento, com 14,3% dos sufrágios (8,3% em 2002). Trata-se de um partido da direita, no passado mesmo de extrema direita, ligado a actividades de milícias para-militares (os «Lobos Cinzentos»), de perfil marcadamente nacionalista, que fez campanha a favor da intervenção militar turca no Norte do Iraque e contra a UE. Esta ascensão também não é propriamente um dos resultados mais tranquilizantes (aparentemente, O MHP está também disposto a viabilizar a eleição do candidato presidencial do AKP, Abdullah Gül, no novo Parlamento). Por último, um olhar sobre o mapa geográfico-eleitoral mostra que a excepção a esta vaga pro-islamista/conservadora/nacionalista – representada pelo CHP-Partido Republicano do Povo, um partido de tipo social-democrata originalmente fundado por Mustafa Kemal e cujo actual líder é Deniz Baykal –, que nestas eleições obteve 20,6% dos votos (19,4% em 2002), só surge residualmente vencedora nas cidades costeiras do Mediterrâneo e na parte geograficamente europeia (ocidental) da Turquia. Num país que afirma olhar para o Ocidente como modelo e ter como objectivo a adesão à UE, a geografia eleitoral tem um mapa curioso. Aparentemente, o secularismo kemalista (ou o que resta dele), está a ser varrido do imenso território da Anatólia por uma avassaladora vaga de transformação vinda do Oriente (culturalmente conservadora e ideologicamente «islamista-capitalista», prometendo mais Islão e mais prosperidade material da UE). Esta já chegou às portas da Turquia mediterrânica ocidental. Resta saber quando e onde irá parar.
JPTF 2007/07/25

Islamistas-conservadores do AKP vencem eleições legislativas na Turquia, com 46,5% dos votos e maioria absoluta de 340 deputados

"Turquia: Durão Barroso adverte que Turquia não está pronta para aderir à UE tão cedo" in Jornal de Notícias, 22 de Julho de 2007

O presidente da Comissão Europeia, Durão Barroso, advertiu, em entrevista hoje publicada num jornal grego, que a Turquia não está pronta para a aderir à União Europeia, "nem amanhã, nem depois de amanhã". "Sejamos honestos. A Turquia não está pronta para ser membro da UE, nem a União está pronta para aceitar a Turquia como membro. Nem amanhã, nem depois de amanhã", afirmou Durão Barroso, em entrevista ao jornal grego Kathimerini, citada pela agência Reuters. Contudo, apesar de considerar que a Turquia não está preparada para entrar na União Europeia, o ex-primeiro-ministro português pediu aos 27 que continuem as negociações. "Gostaria de pedir que a França e todos os Estados-membros não mudem a decisão que tomámos e continuem as negociações", afirmou Durão Barroso, referindo-se ao facto de o presidente francês, Nicolas Sarkozy, se opor à entrada da Turquia na União. As declarações do ex-primeiro ministro português surgem no dia em que mais de 42 milhões de turcos foram chamados às urnas para eleições legislativas antecipadas. As projecções sobre os resultados das eleições legislativas na Turquia apontam para uma vitória do AKP, no poder, com cerca de 50 por cento dos votos, segundo a CNN turca. Quando estão contados mais 25 por cento dos boletins, as sondagens dão como vencedor o partido do primeiro-ministro Recep Tayyip Erdogan, com uma percentagem que vai dos 46.88 aos 51.3 por cento, o que lhe garante a continuidade no poder, com maioria absoluta no parlamento. As eleições legislativas, a que concorrem 14 partidos políticos e 699 candidatos independentes aos 550 lugares no Parlamento, foram antecipadas pelo primeiro-ministro Recep Tayyip Erdogan, que é também o líder do AKP, um partido de direita, liberal na economia e pró-islamista.
http://jn.sapo.pt/2007/07/22/lusa/turquia_durão_barroso_adverte_turqui.html
JPTF 2007/07/22

"As duas faces da Turquia" cartoon premiado de Cristina Sampaio publicado no Expresso, 20 de Abril de 2006

“Turquia: não ao Club Med, sim à UE” in Courrier International, 24 de Maio de 2007

Certains qualifient, non sans ironie, le projet d'"Union méditerranéenne" de Nicolas Sarkozy de Club Med. C'était pourtant bien autre chose que cette chaîne de villages de vacances français existant en Turquie, qu'a en tête le président français. Il s'agirait d'un "club", sur le mode de l'Union européenne, qui concrétiserait une union politique et économique des pays du pourtour méditerranéen. Au cours de sa campagne électorale, Nicolas Sarkozy a défendu à plusieurs reprises cette idée. Mais qu'est-ce donc que cette union ? Qui seront ses membres ? Avec quel objectif est-elle censée fonctionner ? Dès lors que dans ses discours, le nouveau président français attribue à la Turquie un rôle important dans cette union, il est nécessaire pour nous de comprendre l'intention réelle de Nicolas Sarkozy. Il apparaît déjà que ce projet est encore loin d'être mûr. Le ministre des Affaires étrangères et les autres ministres concernés vont sans doute essayer de donner un peu de substance à cette idée. Ce que l'on sait en tout cas, c'est que cette union réunirait en son sein des pays du sud de l'Europe, d'Afrique du Nord et du Proche-Orient. Il s'agirait de favoriser la coopération aux niveaux économique et commercial entre ces pays et de trouver des solutions communes en matière d'environnement et de flux migratoires. Les pays membres de cette union - ils seraient 17 – réaliseraient également des projets communs grâce au soutien d'une "Banque d'investissement méditerranéenne". Enfin, l'union serait dotée de mécanismes de direction calqués sur le modèle de l'Union européenne. Tout cela est bien beau sur le papier. Mais quelle est la probabilité de réussite d'un tel projet du point de vue pratique ? Le doute est de rigueur. En effet, il apparaît impossible de mettre ensemble bon nombre de pays méditerranéens. Les différences et les désaccords sont énormes. La plupart des pays d'Afrique du Nord et du Proche-Orient ont entre eux des rapports conflictuels et ne se sentent pas particulièrement proches de l'Europe. Par ailleurs, sur la base de quelles valeurs cette "union" devrait-elle se construire ? La démocratie, les droits de l'homme et les libertés fondamentales sont des concepts étrangers pour beaucoup de pays méditerranéens. Il n'est donc pas évident de déterminer ce que devraient être les critères et les objectifs de ce "club". C'est pour infléchir la politique de l'Union européenne et renforcer l'influence française en Méditerranée que Sarkozy a lancé ce projet. L'idée de donner un rôle à la Turquie dans ce club fait partie de la stratégie développée dans ce contexte. Il s'agirait donc pour Ankara d'une sorte de "compensation" sensée contrebalancer le refus de Sarkozy de voir la Turquie intégrer l'Union européenne. Or, la Turquie n'a d'autre objectif que de rejoindre l'Union européenne. Sarkozy ne semble pas avoir compris que ce projet d'adhésion à l'UE est une façon pour la Turquie de se projeter vers l'avenir dans le but d'accéder à une véritable modernité. En termes de "clubs régionaux", la Turquie est déjà active, quand elle n'est pas l'initiatrice, de projets de coopération régionale, comme par exemple la "Zone de coopération économique de la Mer Noire" (ZCEMN). Ankara peut donc certainement prendre part à cette "Union méditerranéenne", mais chacun doit savoir que ce "Club Med" ne constituera jamais pour la Turquie une alternative à l'Union européenne.
JPTF 25/05/2007
http://www.courrierinternational.com/article.asp?obj_id=74233

As eleições parlamentares de Julho na Turquia: “partidos procuram amor em todos os sítios certos” in Turkish Daily News, 17 de Maio de 2007

por GÖKSEL BOZKURT - DUYGU GÜVENÇ

The above "personnel advertisement" is imaginary. But it sums up the mood in Ankara, as parties rush to recruit candidates that will burnish and balance their images at home and abroad. The search is on for so-called "vitrin" candidates, a Turkish word for "window front" that might as well translate as "showcase." As general elections approach, virtually all political parties launched the hunt for new faces to promote themselves, signing up - or trying to sign up - former ambassadors, military officers, businessmen, football players and even wrestlers. And now, minority groups. The Turkish Daily News has learned that a Turkish citizen of Armenian origins, Kagem Karabetyan, is being mentioned as a candidate, most likely for the traditionalist Justice and Development Party (AKP), known for its roots in political Islam. Karabetyan apparently wants to run for election but is still awaiting a formal invitation. With or without Karabetyan, the AKP is expected to have a Christian candidate on its lists, but his name is not expected to be on the top of the list, reducing the likelihood of ultimate election. Faruk Çelik, parliamentary group leader of AKP, confirmed that some non-Muslims have applied to run for the party. But Çelik is not sure whether they will be listed as the party's candidates. “It is the right of every Turkish citizen to run for election. AKP will welcome the applications from members of minorities if the qualities of the candidates are in line with our values. One cannot become a candidate just because he is a member of a minority,” Çelik told the TDN. In Turkey, there are around 200,000 members of minority communities. The last minority deputy was Cefi Kamhi in the 1990s.

Wrestlers, football players, musicians
The strategy of AKP depends on nominating famous people as their candidates. Wrestler Hamza Yerlikaya, Turkey's most famous football striker Hakan Şükür and musician Şahin Özer are among these. The ruling party also plans to nominate retired military officers to run for the election.

CHP and minority candidates
The Republican People's Party (CHP) has not listed any non-Muslim candidates to run for election. “We should encourage members of minority communities to become candidates. Greeks, Armenians and Jews should be represented in the Turkish Parliament as well. There are many people who are struggling for Turkey but we cannot reach them because of unexpected elections,” said Şükrü Elekdağ, a CHP deputy. “Kamhi was the one who did evoke the Jewish lobby when Turkey needed its support. I wish he was in Parliament again,” Elekdağ added. CHP has also invited İpek Cem, the daughter of former Foreign Minister İsmail Cem, and artists like Tolga Çandar, Şahnaz Çakıralp to be its election candidates.

MHP flirts with the Alevis
Meanwhile, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) is trying to establish dialogue with the Alevis, a distinct Islamic sect long at odds with much of Turkey's nationalist movement. Timur Ulusoy, the president of the Hacı Bektaşı Veli Association, is a candidate running for the nationalist party. A prominent figure among Alevis, Mehmet Heder is also on the list of MHP. Former ambassador and former columnist for the TDN, Gündüz Aktan, has also applied to run for MHP.

YDP invites Ulusoy
The New Democrat Party (YDP) invited the President of the Turkish Football Federation, Haluk Ulusoy to be a candidate. Mehmet Ali Bayar, a former diplomat, has declared himself a candidate for the YDP from İzmir.

Who is Karabetyan?
Keram Karabetyan, a Turkish citizen of Armenian origins, is a lawyer in Istanbul. He ran for the True Path Party (DYP) in the 1995 elections. There are claims that Karabetyan will run for MHP, but party decision-makers have not confirmed this.
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=73404
JPTF 2007/05/17

“Chpre envia SOS ao Parlamento Europeu sobre a destruição no Norte da ilha” in The Cyprus Weekly, 14 de Maio de 2007

por Alex Efthyvoulos
The destruction of the cultural heritage in Turkish-occupied north Cyprus is a shame and the European Union must intervene promptly to stop it, Reimer Boge the highly influential Chairman of the EU Parliament’s Budget committee said here this week. He was addressing a large gathering at the opening of an exhibition of photographs at the EU Parliament illustrating the terrible and, in many places irreversible, destruction and desecration of Greek churches, monasteries, cemeteries and other Christian religious monuments in the occupied north of the island. More than 200 people, including many parliamentarians, attended the special opening of the exhibition. Boge pointed out that "this exhibition shows only some of the destructions and damages in the northern part of Cyprus. Unfortunately, many places that are witnesses of thousands of years of civilisation and religions in Cyprus are today ruined and some of them beyond repair. This is a shame... Now is the time for all those feeling responsible and committed to European principles to support and not block the restoration as soon as possible". Boge, who is married to a Cypriot Maronite from Karpasia village in the occupied north, said he has visited Cyprus repeatedly and has learnt "about its fascinating history... and the challenges that have to be solved to guarantee the European principles and values for all citizens of Cyprus. Cyprus has become for me my second home country and I feel very much emotionally and politically committed."

Word of desperation
He recalled that Cyprus is now a member of the European Union, adding that "European cooperation and integration must be based on common rules, values and principles such as tolerance, respect, legality and the protection of these principles, otherwise Europe will cease to exist in future". Yiannakis Matsis, one of the Cypriot members of the EU parliament who organised the exhibition, told the audience that the photos on display "cannot give the extent of the catastrophe. On the spot things are far worse. The cultural heritage of northern Cyprus is sending an SOS signal: A civilisation is disappearing." Matsis said the opening of the exhibition coincided with the celebration of Europe Day and "we are all proud of the role that the European citizens of the 27 member states are playing internationally for the protection of peace and stability in the world and the promotion of human rights and basic European principles."Cyprus is asking desperately for help... My words are words of desperation. Cyprus civilisation does not only belong to the Cypriots. Our civilisation in the northern occupied part of the island is part of the European civilisation. “It belongs to the whole world. Therefore, the question is clear: is Europe ready or not to protect her own principles of cultural heritage? We are here to fight for this".

500 churches totally destroyed
He added that "nine thousand years of recorded civilisation in Cyprus is threatened with complete extinction: 500 churches of all Christian doctrines have been totally destroyed. "Mosaics of the 6th century AD have been cut off from the Virgin Mary church of Kanakaria and sold for millions of dollars abroad. "Frescoes of important cultural value have been taken from churches like Antiphonitis, Ayios Thimonanos and many others."

Starting point.
More than 40,000 Byzantine icons have been sold in the markets of the world". Matsis pointed out that EU Expansion Commissioner Olli Rehn "has been politically committed to allocate part of financial aid to the Turkish Cypriots for the protection and restoration of churches and any other religious monuments. But, unfortunately, we are still waiting..." Boge urged the island communities "to join forces in order to address the open questions related to cultural heritage". He recalled that the Council of Europe conducted a study and prepared a detailed report 20 years ago on the cultural heritage in Cyprus. "Based on the findings I suggest that a committee including members of all communities and independent experts should be established in order to inspect and to record the current situation and prepare a plan with possible solutions". He also recalled that the EU parliament asked the EU commission last December to allocate funds for infrastructure projects and the preservation of cultural heritage in north Cyprus. "We are expecting that the Commission will respond to this demand positively. “Of course, a natural, constructive and a fair approach should be adopted to embrace the protection and preservation of all cultural monuments regardless of their location, origin and faith", he said. He concluded saying: "Let use the exhibition as a starting point to present the cultural heritage problems to Europe and European Institutions, with the hope that they will initiate some actions and solutions".and for prompt EU intervention.
http://www.cyprusweekly.com.cy/default.aspx?FrontPageNewsID=304_1
JPTF 2007/05/14

“O erro do AKP” in Turkish Daily News, 11 de Maio de 2007

por Yusuf Kanli

Letters from agitated pro-Justice and Development Party (AKP) and anti-AKP readers of this column have apparently two things in common: They are unhappy with the current situation in Turkey. They are unhappy that this writer is not stressing sufficiently enough the importance of secularism for Turkish democracy or “acting like a mouthpiece for the opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) and die hard so called secularists” and not objecting strong enough to their campaign that did not allow the AKP elect Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül as president although “under the Turkish constitution, the AKP has the right to choose the next president.” First of all, let me underline in all clarity that secularism is the backbone of Turkish democracy. If there is to be democracy in any Muslim society, secularism has to be its central pillar. This is a matter of whether sovereignty is divine or belongs to the nation. So plain and simple... Secularism and democracy are not adversaries. On the contrary, secularism is a sine qua non of flourishing of democracy in a Muslim society. Secondly, in this column I have written scores of times since April 2006 that the election of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan or someone from the AKP as a president of the country has to be accepted by the opponents of the ruling party. But the ruling party should also accept the fact that, headed by secularism, this country has its sensitivities. Rather than trying to impose its own pick as the president of the country the ruling party must enter in a dialogue with the opposition in order to produce a consensus candidate. Seeing that the ruling AKP had no intention of engaging in such a process, and that the fragile democracy in the country could suffer yet another road accident, I wrote many articles suggesting that rather than electing a president by a Parliament heading for general polls, we should consider amending the Constitution and letting people elect the president directly. Alternatively we could go to early polls and let the new president to be elected by the new Parliament. When we were making these suggestions there were still many months left before the start of the presidential election process on April 16. Parliament had plenty of time to debate and legislate the required constitutional amendments, or to prepare properly for early elections. I was not making these suggestions because I was against the AKP or was supporting the CHP. During the same months, in many articles it was me who bitterly criticized the attitudes of the CHP and even accused it of moving away from principles of social democracy.

AKP's premeditated mistake
However, the ruling AKP closed its eyes and ears to all criticisms and appeals of the opposition and wanted to impose its own pick as president on the country. At the same time it ignored all the sensitivities of this nation as well as the fact that it has a majority of two thirds in Parliament but only 34 percent of electoral support. Only a day before the closure of presidential candidacy period Erdoğan declared who he thought should become Turkey's next president. He did not feel any need to consultat the main opposition party on the issue, although he was well aware that the Constitutional Court could decide in favor of an appeal by the CHP that from the Parliament of 550 at least 367 parliamentarians must be present when presidential vote takes place. The end result... A mismanaged presidential election process has landed Turkey into a comical situation of not being able to elect its president. Had Erdoğan consulted the CHP and had he agreed to produce a consensus candidate, we would long have a president-elect today waiting to takeover the presidency on May 16. And Gül, who we value very much as a friend and a successful minister, would not have been humiliated. But, still, rather than leaving election of the new president to the new Parliament, which will be elected in July, the prime minister and the AKP are insisting on hasty constitutional amendments that would allow direct election of the president. Although I too believe that Turkish people must be able to elect their president directly, such a revolutionary change requires a detailed study and comprehensive amendments in both the constitution and legislation. How can a Parliament that failed to elect a president, and which is going to polls, undertake such a revolutionary constitutional amendment? Insisting on “I have the majority, I will undertake whatever I want in whatever fashion I like” is not a thinking that is compatible with democracy.
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=72745
JPTF 2007/05/11

Comentário: A estratégia do AKP e os paradoxos da eleição presidencial na Turquia

A recente eleição presidencial na Turquia, feita na Grande Assembleia Nacional (o parlamento turco), e a anulação da primeira votação pelo Supremo Tribunal devido a falta de quórum, na sequência do recurso interposto pelo Partido Republicano do Povo (CHP) – o maior partido da oposição (secularista e social-democrata) liderado por Deniz Baykal –, levantam várias questões políticas interessantes sobre a política interna da Turquia. A primeira é que o Partido da Justiça e Desenvolvimento (AKP), de raízes islamistas, liderado por Recep Tayyip Erdogan, procurava eleger um presidente da república da sua confiança (Abdullah Gül, o actual Ministro dos Negócios Estrangeiros e ex-quadro do Banco Islâmico de Desenvolvimento, sediado em Jeddah, na Arábia Saudita), aproveitando o facto de, na eleição parlamentar de Novembro de 2002, com pouco mais de 1/3 dos votos (mais exactamente 34, 3%) ter obtido quase 2/3 dos deputados (que é o número constitucionalmente necessário para a eleição do presidente da república na primeira votação parlamentar). Importa recordar que este foi um resultado anómalo no quadro do historial das eleições parlamentares realizadas no país. Só um conjunto de circunstâncias muito peculiares que ocorreram na eleição parlamentar de Novembro de 2002 (por exemplo, o aparecimento do populista Partido da Juventude, de Cem Uzam, que obteve mais de 7% dos votos), à qual se junta o facto de a lei eleitoral turca exigir, pelo menos, 10% de votos para representação parlamentar (um dispositivo para evitar partidos étnicos curdos), permitiram esta enorme maioria parlamentar ao AKP. A segunda é que, apesar de alguma evolução positiva no sentido da aceitação das regras normais do jogo democrático numa sociedade pluralista (e da ideologia conservadora-democrática que é proclamada oficialmente), o AKP não se desligou completamente, nem das suas raízes islamistas, nem de várias reivindicações típicas dos movimentos que se movem nesse quadro ideológico-religioso. Pelo contrário, há vários indícios de que, uma vez tendo atingido o poder, o partido de Erdogan e Gül procurou implementar uma estratégia sofisticada de reislamização da Turquia (tirando ilações do fracasso do seu antecessor, o Partido da Prosperidade de Erbakan). É de alguma maneira isto que se pode verificar quando analisados os quatro anos e meio de actuação do seu governo e o esforço de implementação de várias iniciativas (algumas das quais frustradas pela oposição que lhe foi movida pelo establishment secular – entre os quais as Forças Armadas, que voltaram a fazer ouvir a sua voz nesta eleição presidencial – e, em particular, pelo papel de contrapeso do Presidente da República, Ahmet Necdet Sezer): i) tentativa de reintroduzir a criminalização do adultério, na esteira do dispositivo tradicional da Sharia islâmica; ii) tentativa de revogar a proibição do uso de véu nas universidades e organismos públicos; iii) expansão das prerrogativas dos graduados das escolas iman-hatip (religiosas), que formam os pregadores e «clérigos» muçulmanos, de modo a que estes, no futuro, possam aceder à máquina administrativa do Estado; iv) aumento do ensino religioso e difusão dos estudos corânicos junto das crianças; v) colocação de personalidades com simpatias pro-AKP em cargos importantes do Estado, incluindo o sistema judicial e o próprio exército; vi) reconfiguração da política externa em moldes ideológicos, deixando cair a anterior proximidade estratégica com Israel, em favor de novas proximidades ideológico-estratégicas islâmicas (aproximação ao Irão e Síria, abertura ao governo islamista do HAMAS na Palestina, etc.). Mas o mais paradoxal é que esta estratégia sofisticada de reislamização precisou, em parte, da cobertura da União Europeia para ser viável, ou seja, para não ser interrompida, como em 1997, pelo establishment secular e, sobretudo, pelas Forças Armadas.... Por outras palavras, os «valores europeus» têm sido usados pelo AKP para tentar afastar o controlo estatal das instituições religiosas da Turquia, incluindo mais de 100.000 mesquitas e waqf (fundações religiosas e de assistência caritativa) e criar uma contra-elite islamista. Isto porque secularismo na Turquia não significa tanto a separação entre a mesquita e o Estado, mas, sobretudo, um controlo da primeira pelo segundo. Nesta estratégia de construir um contrapeso para as estruturas seculares, a eleição de um Presidente da República conservador-islamista era, pelas razões já apontadas, uma peça fundamental. Ao contrário da União Europeia, o establishment secular turco percebeu bem o que estava em jogo e como a democracia pode ser usada para cobrir estratégias que visam corroer lentamente valores democráticos e seculares.
JPTF 2007/05/07

Entrevista com Yiorgos Lillikas, Ministro dos Negócios Estrangeiros de Chipre in Spiegel online International, 4 de Maio de 2007

‘Por que é que deveríamos adoptar a cultura turca?‘

SPIEGEL ONLINE: The road to Turkish membership in the European Union leads through Cyprus. Should Turkey not recognize Cyprus and open up trade with the country, it cannot become an EU member. But domestically, Turkey also has a lot of work left to do to implement the criteria for membership. Does the current government crisis in Turkey between the military-backed secularists and the Islamic government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan worsen Turkey's chances of accession and lessen the chances of finding a solution to the Cyprus problem?
Yiorgos Lillikas: Both. I am afraid that every time we have a political crisis in Turkey, Cyprus pays the price, especially should the military return to power. As we have seen in the past, that would mean a more hardliner policy and a more aggressive policy toward Cyprus. Cyprus is still seen by the Turkish military as vital for the country's security. This is a very old fashioned and outdated approach. If they don't change, then the Cyprus problem cannot be solved and it won't be possible for Turkey to become a member of the European Union.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Last December at the EU summit, Turkey maintained its refusal to open up all its ports and airports to traffic from Cyprus and elected not to move towards normalizing relations between the two countries. Do you think the Turkish position might soften once the upcoming elections are over?
Lillikas: I certainly hope so. In the European Union, a lot of partners thought that because of approaching elections in Turkey, the government in Ankara was unable to implement its obligations toward the European Union. If that is the case, then it can also be true of the Cyprus problem.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Given the role the military plays in Turkish political life, why should Turkey be a part of the European Union at all?
Lillikas: If Turkey doesn't change its political culture by adopting European values, then of course it cannot become a member of the European Union. That should be clear for everybody. But we have to keep the incentives alive for Turkey. I am always opposed to those who say that Turkey should never become a member of the EU, because then, the Turkish government has no incentive to pursue reforms. But I am also opposed to those on the other extreme who say that they support Turkey unconditionally. The result is the same. If the Turkish government believes that it can become an EU member without fulfilling the criteria, then it would likewise have no incentive to reform.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Is Turkey's desire to join the European Union the only lever that Cyprus has in negotiations with Turkey over the potential reunification of the island?
Lillikas: Unfortunately yes. We are too small to have other levers. This is why I am dumbfounded when Turkish politicians say they would never accept the withdrawal of Turkish troops from Cyprus for security reasons. Come on! Maybe we are not very clever, us Cypriots, but we are not so stupid that we would attack Turkey.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Is the goal of eventual Cypriot reunification the only reason that Cyprus supports Turkish membership?
Lillikas: This is the main reason. On the other hand, if Turkey stays out of the EU, what is the future of Turkey? If we don't accept Turkey into the European Union, then it will turn to other solutions. But what other solutions are there? There is no other solution.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: And there is no other solution for Cyprus?
Lillikas: No, there isn't.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Given this fact, wouldn't it make sense for Cyprus to support certain EU concessions toward Turkey like opening up trade with the Turkish controlled, northern part of the island - which the EU promised Turkish Cypriots in 2004 but which has been blocked by Cyprus since?
Lillikas: This idea is a paradoxical one. Five days before the accession of Cyprus into the EU, the EU decided to work for the economic development of the Turkish Cypriots and that this should lead to the economic integration of the island and eventually to reunification. The question I asked the Commission though is how, through imposing separate trade relationships, this is consistent with the goal of economic integration and reunification? By establishing separate interests, you lead the country to a division. If this is what some Europeans want -- a division of the island -- it is better to say it clearly. But if we are sincere that we want the reunification of the island -- and according to the accession treaty of Cyprus into the EU, the whole island is already a member of the EU -- they must give an answer as to how direct trade serves economic integration. And they haven't answered this question.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Could one not see the establishment of trade as a symbolic gesture to build trust with Turkey and thus make Ankara more willing to move toward concessions of their own?
Lillikas: If there is someone in Europe who wants to create trust between the European Union and Turkey and to offer more benefits to Turkey as an incentive to integrate with the EU, they should give this benefit from their own country.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Cyprus, of course, continues to insist that the issue of Turkish accession and the issue of trade with northern Cyprus are separate ...
Lillikas: ... they are separate ...
SPIEGEL ONLINE: ... they are legally separate, yes. But if you want to solve the Cyprus problem, do you really think that the two issues can be completely split from one another?
Lillikas: Why should we adopt the Turkish culture? We should think in a European way, not in a Turkish way. The Turkish government, from the beginning, has been trying to negotiate the European acquis communautaire (European law which new members must accept). It is the first country to have done that. Because they say they have difficulties accepting this or adopting that, they ask for something in exchange. Instead of trying to adopt the European culture, they are trying to get into a political game like in an Anatolian bazaar. We don't accept this. Some politicians in Europe are ready to accept it. My answer to them is: They can give benefits from their own country to Turkey.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: But the issue of divided Cyprus is one issue, with roots much further back than the 1974 Turkish invasion. Turkey's EU aspiration is a completely different issue. But Cyprus insists on wrapping itself in the cloak of the EU in order to address this unrelated problem.
Lillikas: The other way around would be very abnormal. Cyprus fulfilled all of the criteria to join the European Union. Had we not been allowed in because of the Turkish invasion, it would have been like punishing us for being punished by Turkey. Cyprus became a member of the EU because we adopted the EU criteria. We have contributed to the European civilization since antiquity. We are not like Turkey which is trying to adopt European culture. We had the European culture and we contributed to its development.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Unfortunately, that doesn't make the solution to the Cyprus problem any easier.
Lillikas: To solve the Cyprus problem, compromise must come from both sides, not just from our side as the small, weakest party.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Is Cyprus really the weaker partner? Cyprus has what Turkey wants and Cyprus can block Turkish membership.
Lillikas: If you think like that, you forget the origin of the problem. The origin of the problem is that there is an occupation. The problem is because Turkish troops came to Cyprus. We cannot start with 2007. If Turkish troops had not invaded Cyprus, and there were no occupation, we wouldn't have the problem with Turkey. We have to go back to the origin of the problem.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,481079,00.html
JPTF 5/05/2007

“Dois projectos revolucionários no Líbano e na Turquia” in Dar Al-Hayat, 3 de Maio de 2007

MP Michel Aoun's call for holding presidential elections in Lebanon through direct popular vote, and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's to elect the president of the republic directly by the people, involve two revolutionary projects which undermine the meaning of the "State" in both countries and that of the Constitution. This Constitution protects the meaning of the "State", strikes a balance between the society's components and stands in the face of deeming easy any attack on that meaning whenever such an attack seems to be a convenient means of forcing any one party's will on others. Despite the differences between the two regimes in Lebanon and Turkey, the similarity lies in their attempt to break the shackles of the law and annul the role of the legislative institution when one party finds it difficult to ascend the throne and another finds it tough to impose its full authority. Aoun doesn't seem to see any glimpse of hope in winning the presidential elections, due within months under the current Parliament which enjoys an unrelenting legitimacy and of which Aoun is a member. He thinks that the solution lies in a constitutional change that might make his dream come true "at least once". On the other hand, Erdogan, whose Islamic Party does not have complete authority over the state through Parliament, wants to dodge the role of the legislative institution and its competences also through changing the constitution. Perhaps Aoun's call is inspired by the mandatory constitutional amendment which extended the current president's term under the Syrian military presence. Aoun considered resorting to a course of intimidation giving the Lebanese nation a choice between polls or bullets, making a point of being a man of the "resistance". Yet, the Parliament member, whose political life didn't make him forget being a General, is grossly contradicting himself in many ways; for instance, he calls for early parliamentary elections, then eats his words when his popularity goes down claiming that "confidence is a proxy given to a member of Parliament in order to represent the authorizer until the next elections". Why does that apply to him and not to the majority members? Once more he contradicts himself as he appeals for a decision to be made by the "popular majority", alluding to his Shiite allies. However, he refuses to attest to the "cliché" of Christians becoming a minority in Lebanon, saying that, "It is not a matter of numbers", because that's exactly what the majority is trying to communicate to him when it stands up for the Ta'ef Agreement. This agreement set the foundation for harmony between the Lebanese people in a way that goes beyond the sizes of sects and the number of its electors paving the way for establishing a "secular" partnership so to speak, and protecting diversity against the danger of monopolization which undoes the meaning of Lebanon. The capricious Aoun is then ready to change his mottos on the spot as long as this serves his purpose of occupying the presidential seat because, in his practices, the end justifies the means. Nevertheless, the Lebanese people who have become well aware of his tactics when he was heading the infamous military government, and bore the consequences of his blunders and temperament won't make the mistake of the "experience of the experienced". As for Erdogan's party which managed to head the government, owing to the elections which awarded it a majority in Parliament, it is all set to back out on this institution in case it would not help extend its authority throughout the country, and wage a war against the judiciary authority which is inspired by and protects the constitution. This scheme not only endangers the stability of Turkey, but also threatens to thwart the eternal dream of the Turks of joining the European Union. Aoun and Erdogan are two revolutionary projects working against the clock and do not bode well.
http://english.daralhayat.com/opinion/OPED/05-2007/Article-20070503-51b4c997-c0a8-10ed-01b2-ede8a6bb8205/story.htmlJPTF JPTF 2007/05/4

“O que está em jogo na Turquia” in Jornal de Notícias, 3 de Maio de 2007

A anulação da votação da eleição presidencial, feita pelo Supremo Tribunal, após o recurso do Partido Republicano do Povo (CHP) – o maior partido da oposição social-democrata, liderado por Deniz Baykal –, mostra uma situação política complexa. O Partido da Justiça e Desenvolvimento (AKP) de Recep Tayyip Erdogan, de direita e raízes islamistas, procurava eleger uma personalidade da sua confiança (Abdullah Gül, o Ministro dos Negócios Estrangeiros), pois na eleição parlamentar de 2002, com pouco mais de 1/3 dos votos (34,3%), tinha obtido quase 2/3 dos assentos. Embora oficialmente conservador-democrático, o AKP não se desligou das suas raízes islamistas. Várias medidas e iniciativas legislativas como a criminalização do adultério, a revogação da proibição do uso de véu nas escolas e organismos públicos, e a colocação de personalidades pro-islamistas em cargos importantes do Estado (algumas frustradas pelo veto do Presidente da República, Ahmet Necdet Sezer), sugerem isso. O mais paradoxal é que esta estratégia reislamização soft precisou, em parte, da cobertura da adesão à UE para ser viável, pois os «valores europeus» serviram também para criar uma contra-elite, oposta às Forças Armadas e ao establishment secular. A questão é saber se a UE está preparada para lidar com a complexidade e especificidades da democracia turca.
OBS: Artigo publicado no JN sob o título O que está em jogo em Istambul
http://jn.sapo.pt/2007/05/03/mundo/o_esta_jogoem_istambul.html
JPTF 2007/05/03

“A mesma guerra diferente campanha” in Turkish Daily News, 2 de Maio de 2007

How bizarre, there is a uniform chorus of genuine amazement at the late night communiqué released from the General Staff HQ last Friday. I am personally astonished at the amazement the communiqué has caused. It was not a declaration of war, it just marked the opening of a new battle in an ongoing war. I was 21, a student of economics and a part-time reporter for this newspaper, when I learned from Suleyman Demirel, many times a former prime minister, then an opposition figure banned from politics, a future prime minister and president, the simple rule of logic that was, in his words: “In order to safely predict what is going to happen, you must drop from your analysis, one by one, what is most probably NOT going to happen.” Two decades later, Mr Demirel's teaching looks applicable in predicting the future of the war - between the ones who say that there is a war and the ones who say that there isn't (as the Canadian poet/singer once wrote.) What is going to happen in the war between the increasingly polarized Islamists (or self-declared Conservatives) and the Secularists (including the Army?) But, first, what is NOT going to happen?

What is not going to happen is (a) the Islamists giving up their strategic fight for a Turkey that is best described in the American nation-building jargon as “a modern Islamic state,” and (b) the Secularists (including the Army) giving up fighting back. With these two options dropped from the analysis, we safely reach the uncomfortable conclusion that the Cold War in Ankara will go on. That given, what other options, then, could be dropped? These would probably include Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his men taking such bold moves as to further provoke response from the military HQ and challenging the already very fragile modus vivendi; and, on the other extreme, the Army taking over in a conventional coup. No, these are not going to happen. But, what will be the most likely “weaponry” in the old war with a “new battle” opened last week? The principal weaponry in the new phase of the War will probably be the miracle word that is taqiyya -- till the next phase which may see less polite weaponry. For example, we will probably see Mr. Erdogan's men, particularly presidential candidate, Abdullah Gul, switching to a more secularist, more moderatist rhetoric, in order not to alert the enemy. And similarly, the generals will “wait and see” when they do not wholeheartedly assure Mr. Erdogan that he should “not worry,” but will privately craft numerous “contingency plans” – more than they normally do. For the same reasons, the “psychological warfare” will gain prominence. Actually, the military's communiqué, among many other objectives, aimed to add ammunition to the “civilian initiative” on the part of the Secularists such as the Apr. 14 and Apr. 29 crowds of millions in Ankara and Istanbul; to reinforce the “new spirit” these spectacular demonstrations may create between now and whenever the elections will be held; and send unity messages at many wavelengths to the hopelessly split opposition. Understandably, there is a uniform chorus of criticism of the military's warning of Apr. 27, timed carefully so as to minimize the financial market damage.

Although the “but-this-is-against-democracy” cliché naturally finds supporters among both one side of now deeply polarized Turkey and unbiased democrats, it does not explain the picture as a whole. It would be fairer to say the military's warning was against “arithmetical democracy,” not democracy in its true meaning. The message looked less like a Thai military communiqué and more like sensible EU warnings that ousted Austria's Joerg Haider. It is always debatable whether it is in democracy's purest spirits if a party should control two-thirds of parliament with votes amounting to one-quarter of the electorate and elect a president only half a year before its term in office expires. Moreover, it is always questionable whether it is “the will of the nation (or its majority)” to have all three of the offices of the president, parliament speaker and the prime minister run by men coming from a political doctrine that has left behind numerous political parties closed down by court warrants over radical Islam – warrants also endorsed by the European Court of Human Rights. But there is more. Essentially, the military's communiqué, (well, the next one may be less polite and come out at the opening hour of financial markets,) without mentioning any political party, said that the military would take sides and defend secularism (vis-à-vis Islamism as a political doctrine.) But what would the General Staff have said? That the military has given up defending secularism? Perhaps Bulent Arinc, parliament speaker, was right when he said that the military repeated what it had always said. But then, if Mr. Arinc is right, why all the high-alert tone at Mr. Erdogan's party HQ? The Constitution authorizes the military to defend Turkey, its secular regime and its territorial integrity against “foreign and domestic” enemies. But who are the foreign and domestic enemies/threats? Of course, the military cannot decide itself, and there must be democratic rules and practices to establish what these threats are. Actually, there are…

What is widely known as Turkey's national threat whitepaper, or in its full formal name, the National Security Policy Document, can be helpful in understanding why the communiqué was not a deviation from democracy, although it may be seen as a deviation from “arithmetical democracy.” The threat paper now in effect was signed by all of Mr. Erdogan's ministers and, finally, by himself. It deems Islamic fundamentalism, the subject of Friday's communiqué, as top domestic security threat – repeat, with Mr. Erdogan's signature underneath. The question is: If the Constitution authorizes the military to defend Turkey against foreign and domestic threats, and if, further, the elected government has established that the top domestic security threat is Islamic fundamentalism, what is so strange about the military issuing a warning against Islamic fundamentalism? In fact, this simple logic very much resembles Mr. Erdogan's political rhetoric. Mr. Erdogan often argues that his party came to power as a result of perfectly legitimate elections for a term of five years, that his party has every right to use this term in full, that it is perfectly constitutional that this parliament elects the next president and, further, that everyone should respect if parliament elects Mr. Gul as president. Both arguments look convincing, and no more or less convincing than the other. Of course, we all know that they are both nice pieces of rhetoric hoping for the best use of what the word “taqiyya” stands for. But that's all normal in a long-term strategic warfare. But what will be the military's next move? We can only know that we cannot know. Anyone with some understanding of Turkey's “military affairs” can guess that there will not be another communiqué soon. The generals think that this time, when they pushed up the volume a little bit, the “music” was better heard. For the time being, there seems to be no reason for “louder music.” That, however, does not mean we shall never hear it louder. Funny, each time there is a warning from the military, HQ people tend to speculate around the word “coup.” In military contingency planning there are always dozens of different scenarios, their proper and prioritized actions, counter-actions, counter-counter-actions and their timings vis-à-vis the threat, but not a coup – a coup is like using a nuclear weapon in a war which an army thinks it can win conventionally, but would resort to when all other conventional options failed. What these contingency plans have in common is their “unpredictability.” How many members of the government, really, how many analysts, speculators, pundits, diplomats were able to anticipate the Apr. 27 communiqué?
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=72078
JPTF 2007/05/02

“Votação presidencial turca anulada” in CNN, 1 de Maio de 2007

Turkey's highest court on Tuesday annulled a presidential vote dominated by concerns over the rising profile of political Islam, opening the way for possible early general elections. The Constitutional Court's decision is crucial for the future of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamic-rooted government, which is at odds with the country's secular establishment over fears it might be trying increase the influence of Islam in public life. On Sunday, at least 700,000 protesters marched in Istanbul to demand the government's resignation. The country's influential association of Turkish industrialists and businessmen, TUSIAD, urged the government to declare immediate early general elections. The ruling party's candidate for president, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, failed to win a first-round victory Friday in a parliamentary presidential vote marked by tension between secularists and the pro-Islamic government. Most opposition legislators boycotted the vote and challenged its validity in the Constitutional Court. Due to the ruling party's majority in parliament, Gul is guaranteed to be elected, at the latest in the third round on May 9. Some secularists object to his candidacy because his wife covers her head with a head scarf and is therefore seen as potentially allowing more Islamic influence on the state. On Friday, the military said it was gravely concerned and indicated it was willing to become more openly involved in the presidential election process -- a statement some interpreted as an ultimatum to the government to rein in officials who promote Islamic initiatives. Members of the ruling party said Tuesday that party officials were considering calling early general elections after the court ruling. If the verdict is in favor of the opposition party and cancels Friday's first round presidential vote, the government could quickly declare early general elections for late June or early July, party officials said. Analysts said that a call for early elections could ease political tension and market concern. "Early general elections seems to be only way out of this business," said Saruhan Dogan, a market analyst with Finansbank. "The ruling party has become a party which is straining social balances." The opposition Republican People's Party, which boycotted parliament's first round of voting, has argued that were not enough lawmakers present to establish a quorum during Friday's vote and that the result should be canceled. "Turkey would be dragged toward a dangerous clash" if the Constitutional Court rules that the vote was in fact valid, said Deniz Baykal, chairman of the opposition party. Erdogan on Monday appealed for stability and drew attention to his strong economic record in a national address. But the Turkish stock market continued its slide Tuesday. The benchmark index, the IMKB-100, fell by 3.2 percent to close at 43,529.49 points. The index had sunk 6.3 percent on Monday as the government came under pressure to declare early general elections. "Turkey is a poorer country compared to Friday," said State Minister Ali Babacan, in charge of economy.
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/05/01/turkey.vote.ap/index.html
JPTF 2007/05/01

“Turcos laicos desafiam islamistas na rua” in Le Figaro, 30 de Abril de 2007

Plus d'un million de Turcs ont manifesté dimanche à Istanbul en faveur de la laïcité sur fond de querelle en pleine élection présidentielle entre le gouvernement islamo-conservateur et l'armée, gardienne des principes séculiers. La manifestation sur la place Caglayan était organisée à l'appel de quelques 600 organisations non-gouvernementales et fait suite à un premier rassemblement qui avait réuni de 500.000 à près d'1,5 million de personnes, selon diverses estimations, le 14 avril dernier à Ankara sur le même thème. Elle vise principalement à dénoncer "la dérive islamiste" en Turquie provoquée, selon les organisateurs, par le gouvernement du Premier ministre Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/20070429.WWW000000077_un_million_de_turcs_manifestent_pour_la_laicite.html
JPTF 2007/04/30

“A oposição turca pede a anulação da eleição presidencial” in Le Monde, 28 de Abril de 2007

Abdullah Gül, candidat du Parti de la justice et du développement (AKP) au pouvoir, n'a pas obtenu suffisamment de voix, vendredi 27 avril, au premier tour de scrutin au Parlement pour être élu président. Le ministre des affaires étrangères a obtenu 357 voix, alors qu'il lui en fallait 367 sur un total de 550 sièges, soit deux tiers du Parlement, pour être élu. Un deuxième tour a été fixé à mercredi, mais le principal parti d'opposition turc a déposé un recours devant la Cour constitutionnelle pour demander l'annulation de l'élection, le quorum ne semblant pas atteint. Un journaliste de Reuters a constaté que 360 députés étaient présents pour le vote. Or selon Haluk Koc, député du Parti républicain du peuple (CHP), principale formation laïque d'opposition, les deux tiers du Parlement doivent aussi être présents pour que le scrutin soit valide. "Le président du Parlement n'a pas accédé à notre requête d'un décompte des députés présents à l'Assemblée pour le vote. Il est évident qu'il n'y avait pas les 367 élus requis et c'est pourquoi nous saisissons la Cour", a expliqué Haluk Koc. La Cour a indiqué qu'elle s'efforcerait de se prononcer d'ici à mercredi. Si elle invalide le scrutin, le premier ministre, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, devra convoquer des élections législatives anticipées. Le chef de l'Etat sortant, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, conserverait ses fonctions à titre provisoire dans l'attente de l'élection de son successeur par la nouvelle Assemblée. Si, en revanche, elle donne raison au gouvernement, M. Gül devrait l'emporter au troisième tour, fixé au 9 mai, car alors il n'aura besoin que de la majorité simple, soit 276 voix, ce que l'AKP peut obtenir sans aucun problème.

CONTRE L'ÉLECTION D'UN CANDIDAT ISSU DE LA MOUVANCE ISLAMISTE
Le CHP et deux petits partis de l'opposition de centre droit, le Parti de la juste voie (DYP) et le Parti de la mère patrie (ANAP), avaient fait savoir juste avant la réunion du Parlement que leurs députés boycotteraient le scrutin. L'objectif de ces formations est d'empêcher l'élection à la présidence du candidat présenté par l'AKP, le ministre des affaires étrangères Abdullah Gül, un ex-islamiste. L'élite laïque de Turquie, notamment l'état-major militaire et l'appareil judiciaire, craignent que l'élection d'un membre de l'AKP à la présidence ne menace la stricte séparation entre religion et Etat héritée du fondateur de la Turquie moderne, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. L'armée et M. Sezer mènent ainsi depuis plusieurs semaines une vaste campagne de défense des principes laïques de la République turque, ce qui, selon certains observateurs, a incité M. Erdogan à ne pas briguer lui-même la présidence. Des centaines de milliers de personnes ont ainsi manifesté contre l'AKP le 14 avril à Ankara. La candidature d'Abdullah Gül revêt un caractère historique car il pourrait devenir le premier chef d'Etat de la Turquie moderne issu de la mouvance islamiste, alors que ce poste est généralement occupé par un défenseur de la laïcité.
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3210,36-903046@51-895736,0.html
JPTF 2007/04/28