A Turkish flag is seen as Palestinians attend a rally in support of Hamas in Gaza city, Friday Jan. 30, 2009. Turkish prime minister Tayyip Erdogan is winning praise from Gazans after his public spat with Israeli President Shimon Peres over Israel’s Gaza offensive. (AP Photo/Hatem Moussa) (Hatem Moussa – AP)
Pictures of Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan are seen during a rally in support of Hamas in Gaza city, Friday, Jan. 30, 2009. Erdogan is winning praise from Gazans after his public spat with Israeli President Shimon Peres over Israel’s Gaza offensive. (AP Photo/Hatem Moussa) (Hatem Moussa – AP)
By BEN HUBBARD
The Associated Press
Friday, January 30, 2009; 1:30 PM
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip — More than 5,000 Hamas supporters rallied in Gaza on Friday, as a leader of the Islamic militant group emerged from hiding to declare victory in the 23-day Israeli offensive that devastated much of the Palestinian territory.
Hamas lawmaker Khalil al-Hayeh appeared in public for the first time since the war’s start on Dec. 27 and remained defiant despite Hamas’ heavy losses.
“We thank God when we see our houses bombed and our institutions destroyed, but our people say yes to the resistance and yes to martyrdom for the sake of God,” al-Hayeh said, standing in front of the damaged Palestinian parliament building. “We say proudly that Gaza has won the war, the resistance has won the war, and Hamas has won the war.”
if ( show_doubleclick_ad && ( adTemplate & INLINE_ARTICLE_AD ) == INLINE_ARTICLE_AD && inlineAdGraf ){placeAd(‘ARTICLE’,commercialNode,20,’inline=y;’,true) ;}
Israeli launched its offensive to stop eight years of near-daily militant rocket fire from Gaza at southern Israeli towns. Nearly 1,300 Palestinians were killed in the fighting, about half of them civilians, according to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. Thirteen Israelis were also killed, three of them civilians.
The aerial and ground offensive ended with a tentative cease-fire on Jan. 18. Hamas has since resumed its rocket fire toward Israel.
On Friday, the crowd waved red and white Turkish flags next to green Hamas banners. Al-Hayeh called Turkish Prime Minister Recip Tayyip Erdogan “a hero” for criticizing Israel over the Gaza offensive during a panel discussion Thursday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Erdogan stalked off the stage after telling Israeli President Shimon Peres: “You kill people.”
Demonstrators burned and stomped on posters of Peres and other Israeli leaders and held up placards with Erdogan’s picture on them.
Al-Hayeh repeated previous declarations that Hamas would not agree to a long-term cease-fire with Israel that does not include lifting the 18-month blockade on the tiny, impoverished seaside strip and opening its border crossings with Israel.
In London, a European Union spokesman, John Clancy, said Israeli restrictions on humanitarian aid flows into Gaza are “unacceptable” and must be lifted. He said about 120 supply trucks are currently entering Gaza each day, compared to about 500 in 2007.
Clancy said the EU had asked Israel to allow its aid workers to be fast-tracked into the territory. It currently takes about five days for a worker to get into Gaza, and the EU wants to shorten that to 48 hours.
Al-Hayeh also said Hamas would only release captured Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit in exchange for Hamas members imprisoned in Israel.
I think the position taken by Turkey in this conflict was strategically right. Although the implementation of strategy wasn’t worked out well in terms of PR, it’s actually beneficial for Israel. Why?
Turkey is truly becoming a leader of the Muslim world, and instead of being an alien bystander, once more taking in hands the moral authority once held by Ottomans. It’s a well calculated policy, and Turkey is already influencing not only the politics but also the hearts and minds of all Muslims (sufficient to say that entire MidEast lives watching Turkish soap operas and television nowadays). Being the leading major secular democratic Muslim nation, NATO member with EU aspirations, Turkey has an excellent chance to become a respected Muslim superpower and a party to deal with in all matters pertaining to Islamic world… and it already is now.
Shimon Perez, being a brilliant veteran politician and a Nobel Peace prize winner knows this very well, which is why he called Erdogan further to say he was sorry about what happened. Because it is in Israel’s and US best interest to work with democratic secular Turkey on all Muslim issues, instead of doing so with a divided, mostly corrupt and radical Arab statehoods. It’s better for Israel to have Turkey as a representative of Islamic world than irrational Ahmadinejad who threatens to erase Israel. And this position taken by Turkey will actually seriously weaken Iran’s influence in the Muslim Middle East but such policy requires getting the hearts of Muslim folk first, which is precisely what Turkey is doing.
But, Erdogan was not the right person to deliver this Turkish message. His behavior was unprofessional, his speech delivered in Turkish instead of English was far weaker and irritating than that of Shimon Perez. This shows that Erdogan is an excellent strategist but a horrible diplomat. Doing so in perpetration by an Armenian-American host was not appropriate. I am not sure who arranged for David Ignatius to be the host of this panel, and perhaps, Erdogan was unaware of it, but a positive side is that even as a host of a major global forum, a person of diaspora Armenian descent was unable to hold off his biases and let Erdogan finish his talk.
Article is written by the moderator of DAVOS David Ignaitus
The Dignity Agenda
By David Ignatius
Sunday, October 14, 2007; Page B07
“We talk about democracy and human rights. Iraqis talk about justice and honor.” That comment from Lt. Col. David Kilcullen, made at a seminar last month on counterinsurgency, is the beginning of wisdom for an America that is trying to repair the damage of recent years. It applies not simply to Iraq but to the range of problems in a world tired of listening to an American megaphone.
Dignity is the issue that vexes billions of people around the world, not democracy. Indeed, when people hear President Bush preaching about democratic values, it often comes across as a veiled assertion of American power. The implicit message is that other countries should be more like us — replacing their institutions, values and traditions with ours. We mean well, but people feel disrespected. The bromides and exhortations are a further assault on their dignity.
That’s the difficulty when the U.S. House of Representatives pressures Turkey to admit that it committed genocide against the Armenians 92 years ago. It’s not that this demand is wrong. I’m an Armenian American, and some of my own relatives perished in that genocidal slaughter. I agree with the congressional resolution, but I know that this is a problem that Turks must resolve. They are imprisoned in a past that they have not yet been able to accept. Our hectoring makes it easier for them to retreat deeper into denial.
The most articulate champion of what the administration likes to call the “democracy agenda” has been Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. When she talks about the universality of American values, she carries the special resonance of an African American girl from Birmingham, Ala., who witnessed the struggle for democracy in a segregated America. But she also conveys an American arrogance, a message that when it comes to good governance, it’s our way or the highway.
That’s why it’s encouraging to hear that Rice is taking policy advice from Kilcullen, a brilliant Australian military officer who helped reshape U.S. strategy in Iraq toward the bottom-up precepts of counterinsurgency. Sources tell me Kilcullen will soon be joining the State Department as a part-time consultant. For a taste of his thinking, check out his Sept. 26 presentation to a Marine Corps seminar (available at ).
As we think about a “dignity agenda,” there are some other useful readings. A starting point is Zbigniew Brzezinski‘s new book, “Second Chance,” which argues that America’s best hope is to align itself with what he calls a “global political awakening.” The former national security adviser explains: “In today’s restless world, America needs to identify with the quest for universal human dignity, a dignity that embodies both freedom and democracy but also implies respect for cultural diversity.”
After I mentioned Brzezinski’s ideas about dignity in a previous column, a reader sent me a 1961 essay by the philosopher Isaiah Berlin, which made essentially the same point. A deeply skeptical man who resisted the “isms” of partisan thought, Berlin was trying to understand the surge of nationalism despite two world wars. “Nationalism springs, as often as not, from a wounded or outraged sense of human dignity, the desire for recognition,” he wrote.
“The craving for recognition has grown to be more powerful than any other force abroad today,” Berlin continued. “It is no longer economic insecurity or political impotence that oppresses the imaginations of many young people in the West today, but a sense of the ambivalence of their social status — doubts about where they belong, and where they wish or deserve to belong.”
A final item on my dignity reading list is “Violent Politics,” a new book by the iconoclastic historian William R. Polk. He examines 10 insurgencies through history — from the American Revolution to the Irish struggle for independence to the Afghan resistance to Soviet occupation — to make a stunningly simple point, which we managed to forget in Iraq: People don’t like to be told what to do by outsiders. “The very presence of foreigners, indeed, stimulates the sense first of apartness and ultimately of group cohesion.” Foreign intervention offends people’s dignity, Polk reminds us. That’s why insurgencies are so hard to defeat.
People will fight to protect their honor even — and perhaps, especially — when they have nothing else left. That has been a painful lesson for the Israelis, who hoped for the past 30 years they could squeeze the Palestinians into a rational peace deal. It’s excruciating now for Armenian Americans like me, when we see Turkey refusing to make a rational accounting of its history. But if foreign governments try to make people do the right thing, it won’t work. They have to do it for themselves.
The writer is co-host ofPostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues. His e-mail address isdavidignatius@washpost.com.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
David Ignatius
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
David Ignatius
David R. Ignatius (May 26, 1950), an American journalist and novelist of Armenian descent[1][2]. As of 2008, he is an associate editor and columnist for The Washington Post. He also co-hosts PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues at Washingtonpost.com, with Newsweek ‘s Fareed Zakaria.
TURKISHFORUM: ORIGINAL OF ABOVE DESCRIPTION, BEFORE THE DAVOS INCIDENT WAS
David R. Ignatius (born May 26, 1950), an Jewish-American journalist and novelist. As of 2008, he is an associate editor and columnist for The Washington Post. He also co-hosts PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues at Washingtonpost.com, with Newsweek ’s Fareed Zakaria.
MEANING HIS BACKGROUND SUDDENLY CHANGED…FROM JEWISH TO ARMENIAN AND MISTERIOUSLY AS OF THIS DAY OF JANUARY/29/2009
PLEASE ALSO SEE THE ARTICLE IN TURKISH SECTIONS ABOUT JEWS TRIBES BECAME ARMENIANS BY FORCE AMONG TURKISH SECTION OF TURKISH FORUM
Ignatius is a graduate of St. Albans School (Washington, DC), Harvard College, class of 1972, and King’s College, Cambridge.
He is married to Dr. Eve Thornberg Ignatius and they have three daughters.
Ignatius’ father, Paul Robert Ignatius is a former Secretary of the Navy and president of The Washington Post.
Career
After school, he worked for Washington Monthly and then the Wall Street Journal, where he covered the Justice Department and the CIA, and was a correspondent from the Middle East. He later went to the Washington Post in 1986, where he has since remained except for a stint from 2000 through 2002 when he was executive editor of the International Herald Tribune in Paris. His writing has also appeared in The New York Times Magazine, The Atlantic Monthly, Foreign Affairs, and The New Republic. His columns are syndicated worldwide by The Washington Post Writers Group.
Bibliography
Ignatius has also written five novels in the suspense/espionage fiction genre, which draw on his experience and interest in foreign affairs:
Agents of Innocence, 1987
SIRO, 1991
The Bank of Fear, 1994
A Firing Offense, 1997
Body of Lies, 2007; Warner Bros. film adaptation, 2008
His 1999 novel The Sun King was a departure from the espionage genre – it is a re-working of The Great Gatsby set in end-of-the-20th-century Washington
In 2006, he wrote a foreword to the American edition of Enemy Combatant by Moazzam Begg.
References
^ [http://www.azgdaily.com/EN/2008121701 AZG Armenian Daily #234, 17/12/2008
^ [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/12/AR2007101202147.html washingtonpost.com: The Dignity Agenda
External links
David Ignatius opinion columns at the Washington Post.
Washington Post, PostGlobal Moderator.
Page on Ignatius at the Washington Post Writers Group.
The writings of David R. Ignatius at thecrimson.com.
Video: David Ignatius discusses how he helped Leonardo DiCaprio prepare for the Body of Lies film.
Video (and audio) of debate/discussion with David Ignatius at Bloggingheads.tv
This article about an American journalist born in the 1950s is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
This article about a novelist of the United States born in the 1950s is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Ermeniler’i yöneten Yahudiler .. MUSTAFA AYDIN
Asırlarca Ermeni toplumunu yöneten Yahudi asıllı �Pakraduniler�in hikâyesi günışığına çıkıyor…
Selanikli Sabetaycılar, İspanyol Maranolar ve İranlı Meşhedilerden sonra Ermeniler içinde de Yahudi orijinli bir unsurun 2 bin 700 yıldır varlığını sürdürdüğü ortaya çıktı. Pakraduniler (Bagratuni/Bagratids) adı verilen ve asırlarca Ermeni toplumunu yöneten cemaatin hikâyesi M.Ö 730 yılında başlıyor ve günümüze kadar uzanıyor. İddianın sahibi, araştırmacı-yazar Levon Panos Dabağyan. Yahudi asıllı Pakradunilerin M.S. 1045 yılına kadar Ermenileri �acımasızca� yönettiğini ifade ederken, iddialarına dayanak olarak dünyaca ünlü Yahudi tarihçilerinden Prof. Dr. Abraham Galante�yi gösteriyor. Galante, �Pakraduniler veya Bir Ermeni-Yahudi Tarikatı� adlı kitabında, �Pakraduniler, varlıklarını Juda İmparatorluğu�nun sonlarından (M.Ö. 7. yüzyıl), 20�nci yüzyıla dek sürdürmüş olan Ermeni-Yahudi karışımı bir kavimdir.� diyor.
Bizans�ın krallıklarına son verdiği Pakraduniler, Selçukluların hakimiyetine girdikten sonra yüzyılımıza kadar hayatiyetini cemaat içinde devam ettiriyor.
Hikâye milattan önce 730 yılında başlıyor. O tarihte, Ermeni Kralı Sannasar, Filistin�e yaptığı seferde İsrail Kralı Osee�yi öldürerek, 10 Yahudi kabilesini esir alır. Sonra onları Fırat�ın ötesine, Güney Ermenistan�a yerleştirir. M.Ö. 700�lerde, bu kez Babil Kralı Nabukadnezar, Mısır Kralı Necho ile Kudüs Kralı Yoachim�e karşı bir sefer açar. Söz konusu sefere, Doğu Ermenistan Kralı Hıraçya da büyük bir ordu ile katılır. Hıraçya�nın bu savaşta gösterdiği olağanüstü başarı, Nabukadnezar�ı fazlasıyla memnun eder ve esir aldığı 10 bin Yahudi�nin yarısını Kral Hıraçya�ya hediye eder. Bu esirler arasında İsrailoğulları�nın önemli şahsiyetlerinden Prens Şampat (Smbat/Shampat) da vardır. Şampat, kısa zamanda Hıraçya�nın takdirlerine mazhar olur. Devlet hizmetine alınıp, önemli mevkilere yükselir.
ESİRLİKTEN SOYLULUĞA
M.Ö. l5O�lerde soyunun Hz. Davud�a (as) dayandığını iddia eden ve adı�Pakarad Şampa� olan bir Yahudi, zamanın Ermenistan Kralı Vağarşak�a başvurarak saray hizmetine girebilme talebinde bulunur. Dikkat çekme ve kendini sevdirme açısından Prens Şampat�ı dahi gölgede bıraktığı kaydedilen Pakarad Şampa, Kral Vağarşak�ın en yakın bendeleri mevkiine erişir. Sonunda şaşırtıcı bir şekilde, Ermeni Kralları�na taç giydirme imtiyazı ile 10 bin süvariye komuta etme hakkını elde eder. M.Ö. 90-36�larda Ermeni krallarına Dikran II. (Büyük Dikran) İsrailoğullarına yönelik yeni bir sefer düzenler.
Bu sefer sırasında esir aldığı binlerce Yahudi�yi o da ülkesine götürür. Esirler arasından seçtiği �Aşod� adında bir asil Yahudi�yi özel hizmetine alır. Bu olaylar sonucunda Ermenistan�a yerleşen ve zamanla nüfusları hızla artan esir Yahudiler, sürgün yıllarının sembol ismi Prens Şampat�ın hatırasını kendilerine rehber edinerek, teşkilâtlanıp millî varlıklarını koruyabilme mücadelesine girişirler. Zamanla Ermenilerin yönetimini ele geçiren Pakraduniler M.S. 1045�e kadar Ermenistan�da saltanat sürmeyi başarır.
26 YÜZYILDIR YAHUDİLİKLERİ DEVAM EDİYOR
�Kripto Yahudilik�konusunda uzman olan Türkiyeli Yahudi Prof. Abraham Galante, �Les Pacradounis ou Une Secte Armeno-Juive/ Pakraduniler veya Bir Ermeni-Yahudi Tarikatı / Baskı: 1933, Fransızca İst.� adlı eserinde bu konuda hayli enteresan bilgiler veriyor: �Pakraduniler varlıklarını Juda İmparatorluğu�nun sonlarından (M.Ö. 7. yüzyıl), 20�inci yüzyıla kadar sürdürmüş olan Ermeni-Yahudi karışımı bir kavimdir. Eğin�de,�Erzurum-Sivas arasında�, Marmara Denizi�nin Avrupa yakasında ve İstanbul Hasköy�de yaşamış oldukları bilinen Pakraduniler, 26 yüzyıldır Yahudi yönlerini sürdürmekte gösterdikleri kararlılık nedeniyle Portekizli Marano�lar, Selanikli Dönmeler ve İranlı Meşhediler gibi Yahudi kökenli topluluklar arasında sayılabilirler.�
Dabağyan, Pakradunilerin kullandığıisimlerin Ermenilerden farklı olabildiğini söyleyerek; Ermeni tarihçi Gatoğigos Ğorenazi�den şu nakilde bulunuyor: �Simpat adını, �Pakraduniler� oğullarına verirler. Bu isim İbranice�den geliyor ve aslı �Şampat�tır. Ermeniler arasında asırlarca pek revaç görmüş olan �Pakrat, Simpat, Aşot, Kakik, İsrael, Tavit� gibi isimlerin Ermeni menşe�li olmadığı bariz şekilde meydana çıkmaktadır.�
Dabağyan, Bizanslı tarihçi Pavstos�un, 3. Asır�da bölgede iskan edilmiş ve kısmen Hıristiyan olmuş Yahudilerin miktarını 400 bin olarak verdiğini de kaydediyor.
NASSİ: DOMUZ ETİ YEMEZLER
Sabetaycılık, Ladino ve Kripto Yahudi cemaatleri konusunda uzman isimlerden araştırmacı-yazar Dr. Gad Nassi, Pakradunilerin 20. yüzyılın ilk yarısına kadar özel gelenekleriyle Sivas/Divriği ile Erzincan/Eğin (Yeni adı Kemaliye) arasındaki bölgede varlıklarını sürdürdüklerini belirtiyor. Nassi�ye göre cemaatin yayılımı, Arapkir, Kapadokya ve Kilikya/Çukurova�ya kadar uzanıyor.
Nassi, Pakraduni soyundan gelenlerin fiziki görünüşlerinin Ermenilerden farklı olduğunu, kafa yapısı olarak Yahudiler gibi Dolikosefal olduklarını kaydediyor. Bir Yahudi-Ermeni�nin evinde vefat gerçekleştiğinde, evin içini tamamen değiştirdiklerini, evde asla su kullanmadıklarını, çünkü ölüm meleğinin kılıcındaki kanı bu suyla temizlediğine inandıklarını belirtiyor. 7 gün iş yapmayıp Yahudilerde olduğu gibi yas tuttuklarını da kaydediyor. Nassi, Pakradunilerin asla domuz eti yemediklerini, cumartesi günü çalışma yasağına uyduklarını, genelde cemaat içinden evlendiklerini ve soyadlarının da Yahudi kökenlerini anlatacak şekilde olduğunu ifade ediyor. Bunun da Ermeniler arasında �Yahudiliğin bir uzantısı� olarak değerlendirildiğini söylüyor. Nassi, Pakradunilerin, ticaret ve finans alanında çok becerikli olduklarını kaydederken, benzer bir grubun da geleneklerini koruyarak 19�uncu yüzyıla kadar Gürcistan�da Gürcüler içinde hayatiyetini devam ettirdiğini ifade ediyor.
RAFIZÎ ERMENİLER KİM?
Fransız Mareşali Horace Sebastiani, Türkiye Ermenileriyle ilgili 1814 tarihli raporunda Ermenileri normal Ermeniler ve �Rafiziyyun/Rafiziler� olarak ikiye ayırır. Dabağyan �Osmanlı İmparatorluğunda Şer Akımlar� kitabında bu raporu değerlendirirken, Fransızların Türkiye�deki etnik yapıya daha 1800�lü yılların başında bile ne kadar hâkim olduklarının anlaşıldığını ifade ederek şöyle tepki veriyor:
�Selçuklular devrinde, Alparslan�ın saflarına geçerek, Bizans�a karşı savaşan ve sonradan İslam dinini kabul eden Ermenilerin büyük bir kısmı, bilâhere �Alevi Mezhebi�ne geçmiş ve öyle kalmışlardır. (…) Demek ki, Mareşal Horace Sebastiani, Fransa�nın Türkiye üzerinde taşıdığı gizli emellerin tahakkuk sahasına aktarılacağı zaman, Osmanlı topraklarında yaşayan bilumum unsurlardan istifade edebilmek için Anadolu topraklarında yaşayanları da iyiden iyiye tetkik etmiş veya ettirmiş!�
Ermeni asıllı Türk vatandaşı yazar Torkom İstepanyan ise Pakradunilerle ilgili şu değerlendirmede bulunuyor: �Türk-Ermeni kardeşliğinin başlangıcı 11�inci yüzyıl ortalarına dayanır. 1064�te Pakraduni Ermeni Krallığına Bizanslılar tarafından son verilince, Bizans zulmüne dayanamayan Ermeniler Türklerin himayesine sığındılar. Bu devre onlar için huzur oldu. Vatanlarına sımsıkı bağlandılar. Türkler tarafından bunlardan� bazılarına �Amiral�lik unvanı verildi. Böylece ilk Türk-Ermeni dostluğunun temeli atılmış oldu. Bu kardeşliğin en güzel kanıtı da bugün dünyanın dört bucağına serpilmiş olan Ermeni toplumunun günümüze dek varlığını sürdüren Türkçe kökenli soyadlarıdır. Örneğin, Romanya doğumlu olduğu halde dünya Ermenilerinin Ruhani Reisi Gatogigos Vazgen I�in soyadı �Balcıyan�dır.� (Sorun olan Ermeniler / Suat Akgül, Ali Güler, Türkar Yay. İst. 2003. s: 402)
�ERMENİ İSYANLARININ ARKASINDALAR!�
Yazar Levon Panos Dabağyan, Ermeni meselesinin can damarını teşkil eden �1. Zeytun İsyanı�nın� arkasında Fransa ve Vatikan�ın bulunduğunu, isyanın düzenleyicilerinin Pakraduniler olduğunu ileri sürüyor. Dabağyan, Zeytunluların kökeniyle ilgili olarak şöyle diyor: �Ani Beldesi�nin Bizanslılara geçmesinden ve Bizanslıların Ermeni katliamından sonra, Anadolu�nun muhtelif bölgelerine dağılan �Pakraduni Hanedanı� mensupları Haçin ve Zeytun havalisine yerleşmişlerdi. Dolayısıyla (Fransa�nın gönderdiği Katolik Ermeni) maceracı Leon, Ermenileri isyana teşvik için gerçekten en münasip bölgeleri seçmiş demekti. Zira, Pakraduni Hanedanı, zaten birtakım entrikalara müsait ve gayri Ermeni bir unsur idi.�
Dabağyan 1862 ve 1895�te iki kez denenen isyanın Türkiye�ye sadık Gregoryan Ermenilerin destek vermemesi üzerine akámete uğradığını kaydediyor. Pakradunilerin de hâlâ var olduğunu belirtiyor: �Hâlâ varlar tabii; ama sayıları ne kadar, organizeler mi bilemem. Sanmıyorum. Ancak, bizde birine �Pakraduni!� dedin mi, bu hakaret için kullanılırdı. Çocukken birine kızdığımızda, �Pakradunisin ulan sen!� derdik. Onların ırklarından gelen bir zekâları, müztehzi bir bakışları, hesapçı, işini bilir bir yapıları vardır. Tarım ve zenaattan çok hep ticaretle, para/finans işleriyle uğraşmışlardır.�
After 18 days of intense negotiations on a new financial package, an International Monetary Fund (IMF) mission failed to reach an agreement with Turkey and left Ankara on Tuesday. Mehmet Simsek, the minister of state responsible for the economy, told reporters on Monday that the talks had briefly been halted and would resume “after the removal of some disagreements on remaining issues.” On Tuesday Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that the talks would continue after a 10-day break (Hurriyet Daily News, January 27).
Since Turkey’s previous $10 billion standby loan agreement came to an end in May, the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government has resisted pressure from Turkish business circles, investors, and international financial/economic institutions to sign a new accord. Although the global financial crisis further heightened the urgency for an IMF program to inject additional funds and ensure trust in the markets, the government preferred to stall the negotiations, because it was reluctant to accept constraints on public spending before the coming elections. It has remained optimistic that it can weather the global crisis with its own resources (EDM, December 10).
The decision to put the talks on hold came as a surprise. On January 25 the governor of the Central Bank, Durmus Yilmaz, estimated that Turkey would have a foreign financing gap of around $30 billion this year and called on the government to sign the letter of intention before the local elections slated for March. His remarks about the progress in the negotiations and his emphasis on ensuring fiscal discipline were interpreted as strong signals that an agreement might soon be reached. Markets responded to Yilmaz’s remarks with stock prices increasing the next morning. When the news about halting the talks arrived, however, stocks fell (Anadolu Ajansi, January 25; ANKA, January 26).
News of an agreement had been expected before Erdogan and Simsek left for Davos to attend the World Economic Forum (WEF). In the meantime, there have been questions about the standing of the Turkish-IMF talks and whether Turkey could postpone an agreement until after the local elections in March.
Disagreements over fiscal regulations and public-sector reforms were the major cause of the deadlock in the talks. Simsek said that although the government did not want to postpone an agreement until the elections, talks on some mid- and long-term structural reforms would continue. According to experts, differences of opinion persist on several issues: local administrations; reform of state-owned enterprises; and the requirements for “financial rule,” which is the IMF’s new criterion for financial discipline. Although the IMF and the Turkish treasury have held workshops about how to define this concept, it remains a mystery to many. One expert claimed that this new requirement included stringent regulations on the budgetary deficit, the interest-free budget surplus, and the ratio of debt stock to the gross national product. These demands will probably require the introduction of new legislation that might limit political influence on economic decisions and curb government spending (www.haberturk.com, January 28; Sabah, January 28).
Some observers argue that although Simsek did his part in the negotiations, the talks hit a point at which Erdogan needs to be convinced (Milliyet, January 28). The likely constraints on the government demanded by the IMF appear to irritate Erdogan. Before leaving for Davos, he asked the IMF not to bring in new conditions for Turkey. Erdogan criticized the IMF for introducing new issues into the continuing negotiation process and reopening issues to which Turkey had already responded. Erdogan warned that this attitude increased Turkey’s concerns and sensitivity and asked the IMF to take Turkey’s unique conditions into account and stop treating it like any other country in the world (ANKA, January 28).
These remarks reflect Erdogan’s belief that Turkey needs to invest to create more jobs in order to cushion the effects of the crisis. He evidently thinks that the IMF’s demands for increasing taxes, tightening the budget, and freezing government spending will limit investments and exacerbate the effects of the crisis on the Turkish people.
Talks between the IMF and Turkey over the new loan agreement continued in Davos. Parallel to the meetings between the Turkish and the IMF teams, Erdogan met IMF Deputy Managing Director John Lipsky on January 28. Following the meeting, both Erdogan and Lipsky told reporters that they had had a fruitful discussion and would resume the talks after the 10-day break (Anadolu Ajansi, January 29).
Meanwhile, WEF President Klaus Schwab described Turkey as the top country in its region, noting its strategic location on energy routes and recently heightened diplomatic profile. Schwab said that Turkey’s recent structural reforms would help it emerge from the global crisis much stronger than before (Anadolu Ajansi, January 28).
Other experts also believe that Turkey is much stronger and better equipped to deal with the global crisis than it was with past economic crises. It was noted at a conference that the AKP government’s previous structural reforms might be paying off, particularly because the banking sector was now in good shape and the government had been relatively successful in reducing public debt, easing the inflation rate, and boosting public and foreign direct investments (Today’s Zaman, January 29).
Nonetheless, most economists have draw attention to the contraction in the Turkish economy. Since the economy is integrated closely into world markets, it is vulnerable to the adverse effects of the crisis. Stagnation in global markets harms Turkish export industries such as textiles and the automotive industry. Consequent drops in industrial production and the utilization of capacity led to a shrinking of the Turkish economy toward the end of 2008, and the growth rate is likely to drop in 2009. Yilmaz urgently called for an IMF accord to avoid liquidity problems and improve credit conditions (www.ntvmsnbc.com, January 28).
It will be interesting to see how long Erdogan will resist such pressures and insist on driving “a tough bargain” with the IMF.
THREE Leeds MPs have added their voices to the mounting criticism of the BBC for its refusal to televise an appeal for victims of the humanitarian disaster in Gaza.
John Battle (Leeds West, Lab), Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East, Lab) and Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West, Lib Dem) have joined more than 100 other MPs in signing a parliamentary motion urging the corporation to reverse its decision.
The Disasters Emergency Committee’s two-minute Gaza Crisis Appeal was screened on Monday by ITV, Channel 4 and Five.
However, BBC bosses have insisted that airing the film would threaten its impartiality and that the corporation should not give the impression it was “backing one side” over the other.
Protests
The decision has sparked more than 15,500 complaints and protests at BBC Broadcasting House.
Mr Battle, a former junior minister, has also raised the issue with ministers at a Commons international development select committee.
Relatives of his sister’s husband live in Gaza and have given him first hand reports of the intense suffering caused by the bombing.
Fabian Hamilton, a member of Labour Friends of Israel, said: “To a child who has lost his parents and whose house is a pile of rubble it doesn’t matter whether it was Israelis or an earthquake. That child needs aid and our help. We have a duty to relieve that suffering.”
Greg Mulholland said he thought the BBC’s reasoning was “utterly flawed.”
A RALLY is to be staged outside the BBC’s regional HQ in Leeds to protest at the corporation’s refusal to broadcast a charity appeal for funds to help the people of Gaza.
The rally takes place this evening from 5pm to 7pm outside BBC Broadcasting Centre in St Peter’s Square, near Leeds bus station.
The BBC has refused to broadcast the appeal by the Disasters Emergency Committee which includes charities such as Christian Aid and Oxfam.
It says to do so might lead to accusations of “bias.”
