Category: Cyprus/TRNC

  • EU urges Turkey to ‘urgently’ normalise ties with Cyprus

    EU urges Turkey to ‘urgently’ normalise ties with Cyprus

    08 December 2008, 19:51 CET

    BRUSSELS – The European Union on Monday called on candidate nation Turkey to normalise relations with island member state Cyprus “as a matter of urgency.”

    The EU in 2006 froze eight of the 35 policy negotiating chapters that all candidates must complete before they join the bloc in response to Ankara’s refusal to open its ports and airports to Cypriot ships and planes.

    Turkey is the only nation to recognised the Turkish statelet in the north of the Mediterranean island.

    EU foreign ministers, meeting in Brussels Monday, voiced regret that Turkey had still not fulfilled its obligations regarding Cyprus, as contained in the so-called Ankara protocol, which it signed with the EU in 2004.

    “Progress is now awaited as a matter of urgency,” the ministers said in a joint text.

    The European Union could decide later to freeze more chapters, thereby slowing down Turkey’s membership bid even further.

    The EU ministers also noted “with regret” that Turkey was making “very limited progress” on political reform.

    However French officials, among those most hostile to Turkey’s EU accession, said that two new policy chapters were likely to be opened later this month.

    That would bring the total chapters opened to 10 out of the 35, with only one successfully closed.

    Cyprus has been divided along ethnic lines since 1974 when Turkey occupied the northern third of the island in response to an Athens-engineered Greek Cypriot coup seeking to unite the country with Greece.

    Source: www.eubusiness.com, 08 December 2008

  • THE FUTURE OF TURKEY?

    THE FUTURE OF TURKEY?

    Ramday Javed Iqbal (lead)

    Alistair Corbett

    October 2008

     

    The Royal College of Defence Studies

     

    RCDS 2008 – CONTEMPORARY STRATEGIC ISSUES

    Key Judgements

    Turkey is likely to internally consolidate its democracy, resolve conflict between secularism and political Islam and sustain economic growth. Some tension between democratic forces and secular elite will remain.

     

    The Kurdish problem will slightly ease up due to mitigating internal political developments but essentially stay frozen due to external regional situation.

    While Turkey-EU dialogue will continue, Turkey is likely to face continuous hurdles in securing full membership of the EU, in the foreseeable future.

    Turkey’s position as a hub of energy pipelines linking Caspian Sea with Europe will increase its importance to EU for its energy security.

    In view of the efforts at resolution of Cyprus issue the likelihood of its settlement has increased.

    The EU attitude towards Turkish membership, Russian reassertiveness in her “near abroad”, the stability and orientation of the Persian Gulf region, Chinese influence in Central and West Asia and the orientation of the future Iraq will determine Turkey’s role as regional power.

     

    Discussion

    Having lost an empire Turkey has been trying to find its soul for a century. Internally, it decided to make a break with the imperial past by opting for a harsh form of western secularism. Economy remained on the rocks. Turkish nationalism was brittle and paranoid. Externally, problems with Greece persisted even as both had membership of NATO. The twenty first century has begun with changes in the internal and external scene for Turkey. How Turkey perceives threats and opportunities in the new environment will dictate the future of Turkey. This paper essentially follows and examines dominant factors to draw relevant conclusions and reach key judgments.

     

    Secularism vs Political Islam. In recent years the long drawn battle between secularism and political Islam has come to the fore. Although Justice and Development Party (AKP) is not yet clearly out of the woods the tide of political legitimacy seems to be turning in favor of democratic forces. The military and judiciary seem to have realized that, political space will have to be conceded to democratic forces particularly when it brings along economic prosperity, keeps Turkey on track for EU membership and safeguards the security interests. Slowly, and due to EU membership requirements, the democratic culture will mature in the mid-term.

    Economy. After the shock of 2001, Turkey embarked upon macro institutional reforms opening up the economy, within the framework of an IMF programme. As a result, Turkish economy has witnessed sustained and robust growth. The current global financial crises will impact Turkey less than others. Having received the dividends it is unlikely that any government will reverse course.

    Kurds. No other security issue has engaged the Turkish mind and energies as the Kurdish problem. The broader issue is not the PKK but Kurdish independence. The US invasion of Iraq and resultant autonomy for the Kurds in the north has raised the spectre of an independent or autonomous Kurd region with Kirkuk oil wealth. This could further create a pull on the Turkish Kurds. In the past, Turkish response to the challenge has been brutal suppression of any Kurdish cultural or political expression. Recently, in addition to military operations the AKP government has slightly eased the political environment. While this may work, the external regional linkages are likely to strain the Turkish restraint in the foreseeable future. The issue will continue to dog Turkish governments for at least another generation.

    EU. The AKP government has undertaken several political, legal and economic reforms to prepare itself for EU membership. It has also maintained a steady political course for securing membership. Meanwhile, it has made reasonable economic progress, remains important to European energy security and made moves to reduce the baggage of its Cyprus issue. On the EU side however, still there are significant historical, religious and psychological barriers to Turkish entry in to the club. In the mid-term this could change. However, this is not, and will not be a settled issue till at least 2015. Eventually, Turkey may choose to be a beneficiary of EU “variable geometry” (ie not a full member but economically integrated while independently sovereign). Turkey will certainly continue to seek markets and allies to the east also.

    US and NATO. Increasingly, Turkey’s anchors to the west are drifting or are under strain. NATO, for decades the bedrock of Turkey’s western identity, particularly for its influential military, has lost lustre. Despite laudable garden-tending by senior officials on both sides, US-Turkish relations have not recovered the depth and breadth they had in the 1990’s. This is happening at a time when Middle East, West Asia, Central Asia and Caucasus are transforming and Turkey’s relevance to the US is increasingly going to come to the fore. Recently, in the wake of August war in Georgia, Turkey has opposed introduction of NATO forces in to the Black Sea. While a dramatic NATO split is not envisaged, in the future the alliance will come under strain.

    Greece and Cyprus. Turkey – Greece rivalry goes back several centuries. However, starting in 1999, the earthquake diplomacy has helped thaw the relations and Greece has supported Turkey’s candidacy for EU membership. Meanwhile, Greek Cyprus has joined the EU – granting Nicosia a veto over all things Turkish. There are efforts at hand to resolve the Cyprus issue. Should they succeed, they will free Turkey from a significant burden and improve her chances for the EU membership as well. 

    Conclusions

     

    Turkey is the heir to the Ottoman Empire, which at various points dominated the eastern Mediterranean, North Africa, the Balkans, the Arabian Peninsula, and the Black Sea region until it met the expanding Russian empire. Its collapse after WW-I created an oddity – an inward looking state in Asia Minor. It sat out 20th century or allowed its strategic space to be used. The situation has changed dramatically.

     

    Turkey is at a critical stage in its quest for a democratic political dispensation and economic upswing. The road ahead remains rocky. However, the signs indicate that Turkey will most likely stay the course and internal stability will lead to its increased potential for playing a regional role.

    Turkey has quietly emerged as the prize in a new great game over who will develop and bring to the EU / world markets the vast oil and gas resources of the Central Asian states. Turkey will in the years ahead become one of the world’s major energy hubs, supplied by the pipelines which will crisscross Anatolia. It will depend on US and EU as to where those lines run and whose products pass through those lines.

    Turkey’s EU project faces a hopeful but uncertain future. The relevance of NATO has dimmed. The US nexus has fallen victim to the US invasion of Iraq and support for the Iraqi Kurds. Yet, all this happens at a time when Turkey is rising and in the future the West’s need for Turkey will increase. The strategic spaces around Turkey are all in turmoil. They have also been traditional areas of Turkish influence. Turkey will inevitably attempt to influence these spaces. How and to whose advantage this happens will depend as much on US / EU, as on Turkey.

     

    Ramday Javed Iqbal (lead)

    Alistair Corbett

  • EU calls on Turkey to get close to Armenia

    EU calls on Turkey to get close to Armenia

     

     
     

    [ 09 Dec 2008 19:37 ]
    Brussels. Alexander Kean – APA. The EU believes that Croatia should speed up reforms, and Turkey has not made sufficient progress for the EU membership, according to a ministerial meeting of the EU General Affairs and External Relations Council in Brussels, reports the APA correspondent.

    The Council welcomed Croatia’s considerable efforts it has undertaken this year, but stated that the country should accelerate reforms, particularly in the judiciary, in public administration, fighting corruption, punishment for military crimes, as well as economic reforms.

    However, the EU said that Turkey has not made sufficient progress in reforms over this year.

    “The Council notes with regret that Turkey has achieved limited progress, particularly on the issue of political reform over the current year “, said the statement.

    The Council underlined the strategic importance of Turkey for the EU and praised its active role in diplomatic initiatives in the South Caucasus and Middle East.

    In addition, the Council called onTurkey to come close to Armenia.

    Ministers noted that Turkey still has to do much more in the fields of judicial reform, fight againt corruption and protection of the human rights, torture and attitude towards prisoners, protection of the rights and freedoms, in particular freedom of speech and faith.

    In conclusion, the Council also added that Turkey didn’t manage to make progress towards improving relations with Cyprus and expressed hope for progress in the near future.

  • Award-winning Cyprus Missing Persons Documentary

    Award-winning Cyprus Missing Persons Documentary

    ATAA to Screen Award-winning Cyprus Missing Persons Documentary,”The Vanished Bus”

    ATAA is pleased to announce the screening of the award-winning Turkish Cypriot documentary, “The Vanished Bus” (Kayıp Otobüs), at the Turkish House in Dupont Circle on Friday, December 5, 2008, 7pm.
    “Kayıp Otobüs” investigates the 1964 kidnapping and massacre of 40 Turkish Cypriot workers, whose lives came to a violent end at the hands of Greek Cypriot militias bent on creating an ethnically and religiously homogenous Greek Christian Orthodox island united with Greece.  Forty years after the Missing Persons saga began, the remains of the 40 workers were discovered in a mass grave.

    Producer Fevzi Tanpinar will make opening remarks and answer questions.  “Kayıp Otobüs” was successfully shown by the United Nations in a Buffer Zone Event in Nicosia, and by the Council of Europe, which houses the European Court of Human Rights.  The documentary is a finalist in the Boston Film Festival, which is being held this week.

    Please join us at the ATAA Turkish House, located at 1526 18th Street, NW, Washington DC. Refreshments will be served.

  • Military Relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey

    Military Relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey

    After the collapse of USSR, necessaries of new states were that economic, politic, military and educational relations with each other and other international platforms and countries. On that way all former Soviet countries created Commonwealth of Independence States union. With creation of CIS, these countries which were unificated on old Soviet map will create new relations on the new world system. Also for regulating new systems, geopolitical situation was very important. Firstly a state can create strong relations where it was near another state.

    If we describe relations between Turkey and Azerbaijan, we will see influence of border factor. Strong relations of Turkey with Azerbaijan are result of near abroad condition.
    Cooperations of Turkey and Azerbaijan had been decreased sometimes. But it ended in new powerful authorities.

    Pro Russian politics of Ayaz Muttalibov influenced Turkish relations as only embassy found. In short time of Muttalibov administrative Turkey was working to make new perspective for other Turkish countries.

    Ebulfez Elchibey who came to power after Muttalibov followed new way Pro Turkish politics as opposite to Muttalibov. So many agreements had been created in economy, military, education, energy, politics and new activities started. First military cooperations between Azerbaijan and Turkey borned in that time.

    In 1992 military education agreement signed between Azerbaijani and Turkish government. In this period Azerbaijan was working to create international pressure circumstances on Armenia about Nagorno Karabakh conflict. So military agreements with Turkey, created new tensions in this region. We can say a diminish symbol with Russia as military.

    Military conventions were less than next years in new political actions to make strong authority and balanced actions period. Haydar Aliyev’s balance political way made a cooperation as pragmatist mind of Azerbaijan. We will see importance of Turkish military agreements. Because if Azerbaijan want to be important actor on this region, it should regulate new relations for the USA and NATO via Turkey.

    In 1996 between the government of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the government of the Republic of Turkey on base of cooperation of staff members of supporting service of Armed Forces protocol signed.

    In 1997 between the government of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the government of the Republic of Turkey on regulation of civil and military flying in 10 km of astride Azerbaijan-Turkey border protocol signed.

    In that time agreements of Azerbaijan with Iran and Russia were targeting only friendship situation and solve problems on bounds And agreements with the USA were not totally military cooperations. It is important to not forget that Russian embargo on Azerbaijan because of Chechen problem increased Turkish inclination on military subjects. Strong relations with Turkey of Azerbaijan will create new diplomatical positions from Cyprus to Yerevan.

    Military positions as international importance of Azerbaijan borned with agreement between the government of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the government of the Republic of Turkey on activities of platoon of Azerbaijan is going to the Kosovo in the staff of Turkey battalion.
    Azerbaijan will keep its soldiers untill period of independence of Kosovo. With this step Azerbaijan became an important and strategical country on extend to East policy of NATO. Azerbaijan won a good position on Caucasus region with taking some other militaryal duties via Turkey in different countries.

    In 2000 between the Ministry of defense of the Republic of Azerbaijan and Head of Naval Forces of Republic of Turkey about giving the attack launch of AB-34 P-134 to the Azerbaijan protocol signed and :

    – Protocol between the Ministry of defense of the Republic of Azerbaijan and Ministry of national security of Republic of Turkey on cooperation in the topographical area,
    – Protocol between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Republic of Turkey on forming and training of profession school of forces kind of Baku,
    – Protocol between the Ministry of defense of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the General Staff of the Republic of Turkey on carrying out of the material and technical purchasing,
    – Agreement between the government of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the government of the Republic of Turkey on military industry cooperation signed.

    In 2001 between the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the General Staff of the Republic of Turkey on development of Nakhchivan 5th army protocol;

    In 2002 Ministry of defense of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the General Staff of the Republic of Turkey on cooperation in the area of war history, military archive and museum work and military publication protocol and in 2003 between the government of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the government of the Republic of on training, material and technical assistance of State Border Service of Azerbaijan by Armed Forces of Turkey and Protocol between Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey on cooperation in the safety of the West-East energy corridor protocol signed.

    Since 1999 Azerbaijan took steps quickly. As opposite to Azerbaijan and Turkey, Armenia and Greece signed an agreement as “Send Armenian soldiers to Kosovo via Greek army”. Armenian parliament agreed this on 13 December 2003. According to this agreement 30 Armenian soldiers had gone to Kosovo with ratification of Ministry of Defence of Armenia. It had been explained as to support European-Atlantic integration on South Caucasus. Against to modernization of Azerbaijan by Turkish Military Forces, Greece take a decision to support to Armenian army. Also military cooperations created influences on political problems. In that time mix circumstances about these events will share a balance of situations on energy and trade agreements.

    After the September 11 terrorist acts, Azerbaijan supported the decision of counter attack to terrorism of the USA. So it sent some peacekeepers to Afghanistan and opened air space for American forces. These actions share Turkish support and modernisation to Azerbaijani army. Azerbaijan use this experiment to be main actor in the region.

    In 2004 and 2005 between the government of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the government of the Republic of Turkey on long-term economical and military cooperation and between the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the General Staff of the Republic of Turkey on application of the financial aid protocol signed.

    And in 2006 between the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the General Staff of the Republic of Turkey on application of material and technical provision protocol shared new improvements of new actor.

    Since 2006 new approaches regulated cooperations with other states :
    – Supports of Azerbaijan to Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus,
    – Turkey purchases rockets from the USA,
    – New relations of Georgia, Azerbaijan and Turkey as result of alternative energy way against to Russia.

    Same year new circumstances created balance regulations for Azerbaijan with agreement of natural gas project with Greece. It was political and militaryal goal of Azerbaijan because Yerevan loosed its good militaryal and political relations with Greece. So it must choose a new way as balance politics.

    There is a balance activities with military cooperations of Azerbaijani relations from the independence time. Pro Turkish military activities regulated international perspective on problems of Azerbaijan. Example, mainly Azerbaijan use Cyprus card about Greek support to Armenia. And also it used totally the USA and NATO supports and created new politics as alternative to Russia. We can say thay experiments of Elchibey’s totally Pro Turkish politics and Aliyev’s balance politics which agree all region as a whole will regulate positions of Caucasus region.

    Mehmet Fatih ÖZTARSU / Baku Qafqaz University

  • Duchess and Daughters: Their Shambolic Secret Mission

    Duchess and Daughters: Their Shambolic Secret Mission

    FTA UK Press Release
    London, 10th November 2008
    The Federation of Turkish Associations UK would like to voice their extreme frustration and disappointment at the actions and comments of the Duchess of York, presenter Chris Rogers and inferences made by Barrister John Cooper in the broadcasting of the distorted portrayal of Turkey in the programme “Duchess and Daughters: Their Secret Mission” aired by ITV on the 6th October 2008.

    The rules and broadcasting codes laid out by Ofcom have been infringed according to section 1: “protecting the under eighteens”, section 2: “harm and offence”, section 3: “crime”, section 5: “due impartiality and due accuracy”, section 7: “fairness” and section 8: “privacy” and we are reporting these infringements to Ofcom and expect a full and detailed explanation of why this programme has been allowed to be aired. 

    Duchess and Daughters: Their Shambolic Secret Mission 

    The Federation of Turkish Associations UK would like to voice their extreme frustration and disappointment at the actions and comments of the Duchess of York, presenter Chris Rogers and inferences made by Barrister John Cooper in the broadcasting of the distorted portrayal of Turkey in the programme “Duchess and Daughters: Their Secret Mission” aired by ITV on the 6th October 2008. 

    As an NGO based in the UK, we have to clarify that our criticism regarding this programme is not because it is highlighting an institution which certainly needs improvement or to defend the methods used to treat mentally or disabled children under state protection in those institutions, but the presentation made and the wording used in the program to accuse and insult the Turkish nation as a whole. 

    We would of course like to see things improve in the social services in Turkey and as we are informed many improvements have been made over recent years. It is a pity that this programme has been made in such a way as to misguide the British public as to the conditions and attitudes towards disabled children in Turkey and has created negativity in the relations between the two countries and more seriously created grave concerns amongst the Turkish community in this country as to the aims and sincerity of ITV. 

    It is clear that the programme from the beginning had a separate agenda, perhaps to glorify the work of the Duchess of York or as a locomotive to encourage opposition to Turkey’s aspirations about the EU. It seems that the producers of the programme had in mind more of a two-pronged PR stunt aimed firstly at demonising Turkey and secondly at improving the flailing popularity of the Duchess of York at someone else’s expense. Perhaps in her own mind, she imagines she can fill the void left by Princess Diana who was a true campaigner for humanitarian causes. Unfortunately, our members do not believe that she sincerly cares about the issue and suggest she participate in a programme uncovering some of the child abuse cases that are frequently uncovered in Britain or to visit the war zones in Afganistan and Iraq to see the gross humanitarian crisis, particularly in the lives of innocent children.  

    Secret cameras used to film as if there were some cloak and dagger activities going on seem to be gimmicks used to imply that the Duchess was in some form of danger in Turkey. Another reference to police stopping the camera crew likened Ankara to some third world war zone, sensationalising the programme. Some of our members have been stopped and searched several times in the centre of London and they don’t need a camera to prove this since ‘stop and search’ is used as a regular practice by Metropolitan Police.  

    In any case the institutions visited by the Duchess were not orphanages for abandoned children as portrayed, but institutions for the mentally disabled. These institutions so ‘secretly’ filmed by the Duchess are open for inspection on a regular basis to NGO’s from anywhere in the world and not ‘hidden away’ as implied by the documentary. After the filming, no respect was shown to the rights of those filmed to protect their identity and no permission was obtained to show the film from the families of those involved. This is a gross violation of their rights. 

    Certain actions and generalisations used in the programme have been found very offensive by our members and have led to distress and disillusionment across a wide section of our community. Comments made such as “Many of these children are abandoned by their parents because in Turkey there is a shame associated with having a disabled child” is an unfair and untrue generalisation suggesting that Turkish people do not care about their handicapped. 

    Turkey has a population estimated at 70 million, of which 3% are registered as either physically or mentally disabled putting the total amount of handicapped people at approximately 2.1 million. The number of mentally disabled children in these 53 homes and institutions total only 3673 given by the State Ministry of Women and Family Affairs. This in itself shows, contrary to the accusations in the programme, that the vast majority of handicapped children are looked after in the home. The new initiatives set up by the government are facilitating even more of those in homes to be looked after back in their family unit. Unlike Britain, in Turkey most of the families look after their handicapped children at home and without any financial assistance from the government. Those children shown in the documentary are there because they come from extremely poverty stricken families or broken homes. 

    Again, claims by Barrister John Cooper “any country that treats its children like this is not ready to accede to a family of nations that aspire to dignity and humanity” is an insult to the whole nation and has given our members the feeling that the whole programme has been engineered to smear Turks and Turkey in an attempt to sabotage their accession. We would be very pleased if all EU member countries treat their children as he claims but we all know his statement is far from truth. 

    Comments like “Europe’s forgotten children”, “no hope for kids”, “born with a life sentence”, “grave concerns on Turkey’s human rights record” and many others are all exaggerated and unfair to the children or staff of the institutions shown in the programme.  

    Many things were also wrongly implied, for example, the impression was given that Britain is only giving support to Turkey because they need their cooperation in the war on terror. This is an outrageous claim, since Turkey has been on the forefront of fighting terrorism for many years and has suffered attacks at the hands of Al Qaida on several occasions.  

    It is very regrettable that such a programme has been aired, ignoring the damage it will make to the innocent people who live and work in those institutions. It is essential when doing any programme that a complete and balanced view be provided for the viewer and this is the responsibility not only of those involved in the filming but more so by the producers and broadcasters whom in this instance, have shown a blatant disregard for professional ethics.  

    We believe the rules and broadcasting codes laid out by Ofcom have been infringed by ITV1 according to section 1: “protecting the under eighteens”, section 2: “harm and offence”, section 3: “crime”, section 5: “due impartiality and due accuracy”, section 7: “fairness” and section 8: “privacy”. Therefore, we are reporting these infringements to Ofcom and expect a full and detailed explanation of why this programme has been allowed to be aired. 

    We believe that the “Every Child Matters” policy of the Government is vital and should be made universal. Whatever a child’s background or circumstances, they should be given the support they need to stay safe and healthy, enjoy, achieve, make a positive contribution and reach economic wellbeing. Therefore, we all have to work towards making the lives of all children better wherever in the world they may live, certainly not using them as a tool for personal or political aspirations just because they are a member of another nation. The positive approach would be offering sincere help by providing training courses in working with the disabled and psychiatrically disturbed and supporting those NGO’s who are making a difference to their inadequate system of caring for the disabled. 

    We as viewers have every right to expect fair, impartial, accurate and balanced programs from ITV and are therefore demanding that another program be aired to repair the damage done and help those affected. We also expect an apology from the Duchess of York for not acting responsibly and taking part in a program based on politics to smear Turkey by exploiting mentally disabled Turkish children and her daughters should realise that it is us, the British taxpayer that provides them with their luxurious lifestyles not Turkish or Romanian. If the Duchess and her daughters want to get involved in good causes there are many deserving groups in this country who may welcome their involvement and their financial contribution. Charity begins at home.

    Notes to editors

    About FTA UK

    The Federation of Turkish Associations UK (FTA UK) was formed in 2002 consisting of sixteen independent and diverse Turkish associations to bring together the voice of their members on common issues. The FTA UK represents a large proportion of the Turkish community which is estimated at nearly 500,000 ethnic Turks who live mainly in London and its surrounding areas and includes Turkish Cypriots.

    The Federation’s main aims and objectives are; to bring together the Turks living in Britain in solidarity and strengthen their relationship; to help the community to integrate better within the British system whilst maintaining their own culture and identity; to find solutions to their common problems and protect their common interests; to promote and enhance the British – Turkish friendship and to share the Turkish culture and history.

    The Federation carries out its duties completely independently without being influenced by any political party, ethnic influence, religion or any form of discrimination and in the interest of the British-Turkish Community. It is a non profit – non governmental organisation and acts as an umbrella organisation and communication vehicle for the whole community. 

    Contact FTA UK :

    E-mail: turkishfederationuk@yahoo.co.uk
    Post: FTA UK, 41 Camberwell Church Street, London SE5 8TR
    Telephone : + 44 (0)77 7000 003