Category: News

  • History of Istanbul

    History of Istanbul

    What is now called Asian Istanbul was probably inhabited by people as early as 3000 BC. Eventually, in the 7th century, Greek colonists led by King Byzas established the colony of Byzantium, the Greek name for a city on the Bosphorus. Byzas chose the spot after consulting an oracle of Delphi who told him to settle across from the “land of the blind ones.” Indeed, Byzas concluded, earlier settlers must have been deprived of their sight to have overlooked this superb location at the mouth of the Bosphorus strait. This proved an auspicious decision by Byzas, as history has shown Istanbul’s location important far beyond what these early Greek settlers might possibly have conceived. Byzas gave his name to the city: Byzantium.

    In the early 100’s BC, it became part of the Roman Empire and in 306 AD, Emperor Constantine the Great made Byzantium capital of the entire Roman Empire. From that point on, the city was known as Constantinople. The mid 400’s AD was a time of enormous upheaval in the empire. Barbarians conquered the western Roman Empire while the Eastern, also called the Byzantine Empire, kept Constantinople as its capital. In 532 during the reign of Justinian I, antigovernment riots destroyed the city. It was rebuilt, and outstanding structures such as Hagia Sophia stand as monuments to the heights Byzantine culture reached.

    Read more : 

     

  • Istanbul unveils European Capital of Culture 2010 plans

    Istanbul unveils European Capital of Culture 2010 plans

    (ISTANBUL) – Istanbul on Thursday unveiled its plans for celebrating its nomination as European Capital of Culture 2010.

    The projects, ranging from street art to music festivals, are dedicated to the ancient philosophy of Aristotle who said everything is made up of the four elements: earth, air, fire, and water.

    “This is how we interpret Istanbul. We believe that the culture that has permeated Istanbul for many centuries, allowing a Greek man to work with an Armenian artisan, a Turkish businessman and a Jewish trader, is a good example for the world today,” said Nuri Colakoglu, president of the Istanbul-2010 committee.

    International architects Renzo Piano and Norman Foster are involved in a project to transform the working-class district of Yenikapi.

    Around it lies a new archeological park, which showcases items uncovered from the ancient Byzantine harbour of Eleutherios, including the body of a third-century emperor and about 30 ships.

    A number of modern art exhibitions comprising plastic objects will also be displayed, and organisers have invited prominent artists to work alongside their younger counterparts in the run up to 2010.

    Istanbul was awarded European Capital of Culture status for 2010 in 2006 by the European Union, along with the German town of Essen and the Hungarian city of Pecs.

    Source: www.eubusiness.com, 27 November 2008

  • Time to Say `No’ to World Government

    Time to Say `No’ to World Government

    21st CENTURY Science & Technology

    THE COMING ICE AGE: Why Global Warming is a Scientific Fraud

    Introduction:  Time to Say `No’ to World Government

    by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
    November 1997

    As this Special Report goes into production, George Soros’s operations are reported as having lost an amount in excess of 2 billion U.S. dollars equivalent, much of this in the last two weeks’ unsuccessful efforts to break the Hong Kong economy as the same forces had successfully looted Thailand and other Asian economies earlier.

    Nonethless, the piratical speculative assault on Japan, Korea, and China continues, with the London financial center calling new forces from Sweden and other parts of Europe, for the next round of assaults. Thus does London continue to saw at the branch upon which it sits.

    No matter what else may occur, by the close of the present century, plus or minus a year or two, the international financial system, as we have known it during the most recent decades, will have ceased to exist. Either a concert of governments will act to put the present system out of its misery, by declaring it bankrupt and putting its institutions into receivership, or, if governments lack the nerve to do so, then the system will self-destruct, leaving global chaos behind.

    The point I am making, is that what have become, until now, the “mainstream” trends in policy-making, during the course of the recent 30 years, are now facing an abrupt end. Most of these trends will end automatically, through the unstoppable collapse of the institutions associated with them. Others, unfortunately, might outlive the inevitably doomed present international financial system. However, at the worst, the time is either here, or fast approaching, when it may be possible to summon sufficient popular support to bring certain malicious, dangerous hoaxes of the recent decades to an end.

    Among those trends which must be ended, is a series of frauds, beginning with Rachel Carson’s {Silent Spring} hoax against the safest insecticide since the invention of birds, DDT. Since then, the virtual banning of DDT has killed countless human beings through the pests whose menace to humanity had been virtually ended with DDT. Since then, the rate of human sickness and even death through tainted food, has been escalating as a result of another hoax, the anti-scientific charge, that chloroflourocarbons are the cause for man-made depletion of the so-called ozone layer. Now, the same hoaxsters are deployed by Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair and his European allies from behind Alice’s Looking-Glass, in demanding an accelerated increase in misery, sickness, and death-rates, through a “Global Warming” hoax.

    There are three leading issues among those which should impel us to rid our planet of these anti-scientific hoaxes put forward in the name of “ecology.”

    (1) The Issue of National Sovereignty

    The chaotic state of economic and monetary affairs being unleashed by the present global financial crisis, is creating a situation in which either sovereign nations return to significant degrees of economic protectionism, or the entire planet will collapse into a ruinous state of

    chaos worse than anything imagined during this century to date.

    Under these conditions, it is necessary to bring to an end, and to reverse trends toward imposing self-enforcing, supra-national rule over the internal affairs of national economies. Most of the so-called “population” and “ecology” regulations already in place should be repealed, and, certainly, no new such regulations ought to be tolerated.

    (2) The Issue of National Economy

    There has been no net physical-economic growth in the U.S. economy, since the 1970-1972 interval of breakdown of the replacement of the old Bretton Woods agreements by the increasingly chaotic and corrosive effects of maintaining a “floating exchange-rate system.” Measured in physical content of market-baskets, including maintenance of infrastructure and productive capital, per capita of labor-force, the U.S. economy’s productivity has collapsed by about half during the recent three decades.

    The reported growth of employment in the U.S. economy, is in forms of administrative and unskilled services, while the percentile of the employed labor-force in production occupations has collapsed catastrophically. Otherwise, the alleged growth of the economy is a mixture of fraud and self-deception cloaked in a mushroom-cloud of purely parasitical financial speculation.

    Without both a massive infusion of such elements of infrastructure as water-management, modern mass transit, massive expansion of power production, and renewal and modernization of urban infrastructure and productive capital, the physical economy of leading and other nations will spiral into an early state of general collapse. Without purging the system of groundless, irrational restrictions imposed in the abused name of “ecology,” it is human beings who become the world’s leading endangered species.

    (3) The Issue of Technology

    If we measure market-baskets of incomes of households, infrastructure-maintenance, agriculture, and manufacturing in terms of “energy of the system” standards, per capita of labor-force, the productivity of the U.S. economy has been declining during the recent quarter of a century, a collapse which is becoming nearly irreversible during any future medium-term period. This danger to the human species can not be resisted effectively without introducing high rates of technological attrition. This will require us to apply the intensity of credit and other investment incentives to scientific and technological progress in peace-time production of power, mass-transit, and goods, which we have pushed previously only as a part of national-defense mobilization.

    We must remove unnecessary bureaucratic and related obstacles to such greatly increased emphasis upon investment in scientific and technological progress.

    For these three and other implicit reasons, the time has come, for rational people to join forces, in reexamining the so-called “ecology issue.” It is time to bring reason back into policy-making of government, and to purge the system of the kinds of anti-scientific hoaxes which should never have been tolerated in the first place.

    Thus, the time has come for a fresh examination of some of the worst of the hoaxes which have been made virtual articles of religious blind faith among the “ecology lobby” set. Let us return to the proven methods for “cleaning up the environment,” deploying the technologies needed to do the job.

    Economist Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. is a Contributing Editor of the Executive Intelligence Review, and a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of 21st Century Science & Technology magazine.

    Source: www.larouchepub.com, November 1997

  • Turkey’s Liberals Speaking Out as Reform Stalls

    Turkey’s Liberals Speaking Out as Reform Stalls


    Memo From Istanbul
    By SABRINA TAVERNISE

    ISTANBUL — When Recep Tayyip Erdogan was first elected prime minister of Turkey six years ago, his policy moves were brave and new, and this country’s liberals quickly lent him their support. He started accession talks with the European Union, stopped aggressive rhetoric on age-old disputes like the island of Cyprus, and told Turkey’s oppressed Kurdish minority, in a groundbreaking speech, that it existed.

    And while liberals had grown anxious in recent years, waiting for reforms that kept being deferred, in part because Mr. Erdogan’s party was tied up in legal battles for survival, they supported him, hoping he would return to his agenda.

    Now, that seems to be changing. Liberal columnists and intellectuals have begun criticizing Mr. Erdogan for what they say is a shift away from his reformist ways toward a more nationalist line, closer to Turkey’s powerful military.

    “Erdogan changed the whole discourse,” said Hasan Cemal, a columnist for the daily newspaper Milliyet. “This is the kind of disillusionment we have been having.”

    One of the most glaring example of the shift, liberals say, is a speech Mr. Erdogan gave this month in the predominantly Kurdish city of Hakkari in the southeast. His language there, liberals said, resembled the tone of Turkey’s nationalists, hard-line patriots whose message to Kurds, nearly a fifth of Turkey’s population, is accept Turkish identity or get out.

    “These were not the words of a reformer,” said Yasemin Congar, deputy editor in chief of Taraf, a liberal newspaper.

    Turkey’s dismal relationship with its Kurdish population has been at the heart of politics in this country ever since the state was founded in 1923, and liberals argue that Turkey will be never become a truly free democracy if it is not improved.

    An adviser to Mr. Erdogan said that the contents of the speech were not new, and that the liberals’ frustration came more from their high expectations for a solution to the Kurdish problem than from any change in direction by Mr. Erdogan. The problem has existed for decades, he argued, and untangling it will take time.

    “They want the government to create a miracle,” said the adviser, who was not authorized to speak publicly on the issue.

    But liberals use the argument in reverse, saying that the Turkish state has spent years dragging its feet on the issue, which led to a war in the 1980s between a separatist group, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or P.K.K., and the military.

    The violence quieted over the years, but Kurds’ basic demands — like recognition as an ethnic group — were never met. Liberals say they threw their support behind Mr. Erdogan because they believed that he would be the one with the courage to change that, but six years into his prime ministership, little has been done.

    “People expected him to come up with some major political promises,” said Altan Tan, a Kurdish intellectual from Diyarbakir, the largest city in the Kurdish southeast, “but his strengthened rhetoric was the straw that broke the camel’s back. People are still in shock.”

    The speech was particularly painful for liberals because they compared it to one he gave in August 2005, when he acknowledged that Turkey had a “Kurdish problem” and that the state was partly responsible, shattering many taboos.

    “This is a different Erdogan from the Erdogan of 2005,” said Yavuz Baydar, a columnist for the daily Today’s Zaman. “This one issues threats. This one does not sound conciliatory.”

    But his language needs to be seen in the context of what happened on the day he made it, Mr. Erdogan’s adviser argues. Local elections are scheduled for March, and the P.K.K. is applying pressure.

    Mr. Erdogan said in an interview this month that when he reached Hakkari on the day of the speech, “it was absolutely silent,” because P.K.K. supporters warned residents to turn off their car engines. Protesters had broken shop windows and set cars on fire before his arrival to give the appearance of chaos.

    “I have no problems with my citizens of Kurdish origin,” Mr. Erdogan said. “The thing to be questioned is violence.”

    Mr. Erdogan has promised work and better services in his speeches, Mr. Tan said, but has said nothing about ethnic rights, an approach that has given Kurds the impression that they must give up their cultural demands for economic ones.

    Though the majority of Kurds do not want a separate state, jobs alone will not be enough to make a real change, he said.

    “Kurds sincerely want to be a part of the country as equal citizens with democratic rights,” he said.

    Mr. Erdogan has not had it easy. For almost two years his Islamic-inspired party, Justice and Development, or AKP, has been tossed from one political crisis to another as Turkey’s entrenched secular establishment has fought it over power.

    After his party narrowly missed being abolished in the summer, many liberals believe that Mr. Erdogan struck a compromise with the military — a powerful institution that has pressed elected governments from behind the scenes for decades — making the calculation that to stay in power meant dropping reforms.

    “He probably thinks, ‘If they catch me again, they will ban me,’ ” Ms. Congar said. “He can’t lead with this fear. He has to be brave with reforms.”

    Mehmet Altan, a columnist for the daily Star, was more pessimistic about AKP, saying, “Now Ankara’s status quo has it by the neck, and a change is almost impossible.”

    The result, Mr. Baydar argued, is “a new, sort of confused, aimless, AKP.”

    Perhaps the bitterest disappointment has been over the accession talks with the European Union, which have drifted. Plans for rewriting the Constitution — a central requirement— were shelved this spring after a court struck down Parliament’s repeal of a headscarf ban in universities. Some liberals described Mr. Erdogan’s push to allow the headscarf as an early break, because it left the impression that he was putting religious freedoms over issues more important to liberals, like freedom of expression.

    When asked about plans for the Constitution in an interview in Today’s Zaman, Cemil Cicek, a top AKP official, said, “Desire is one thing and reality is another.”

    Mr. Cemal, of Milliyet, said: “The important thing is whether Erdogan is still sincere about Turkey’s membership accession to E.U. I started having doubts about that.”

    Mr. Tan said some still believed that the party would get back on the European Union track, “like a final jump from a dying man.”

    “He’s banking on the fact that there’s no alternative to him right now,” Ms. Congar said. “If he creates a vacuum, somebody is going to fill it.”

    Sebnem Arsu contributed reporting.

  • ERDOGAN VISITS INDIA: BILATERAL TRADE AND TURKISH-ISRAELI-INDIAN ENERGY COOPERATION ON THE AGENDA

    ERDOGAN VISITS INDIA: BILATERAL TRADE AND TURKISH-ISRAELI-INDIAN ENERGY COOPERATION ON THE AGENDA

    By Saban Kardas

    Tuesday, November 25, 2008

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited India from November 21 to 24, against a background of growing economic ties between the two nations. Erdogan was the first Turkish prime minister to visit India since Bulent Ecevit’s visit in 2000. Erdogan met Indian President Pratibha Patil, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee. He visited India’s historical and cultural sites and technological centers and held meetings with Turkish and Indian businessmen (www.akparti.org.tr, November 21-24). 

    Turkish State Minister Mehmet Aydin, Minister of Industry and Trade Zafer Caglayan, and Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Hilmi Guler were part of the Turkish delegation. Earlier this year, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan and Minister of State for the Economy Kursat Tuzmen visited India, and President Abdullah Gul is expected to go there in the first half of 2009. This busy diplomatic agenda, as the latest of Turkey’s ambitious openings to its neighboring regions, shows that the AKP government considers India a strategic partner and major market in East Asia (Cihan News Agency, November 20).

    Also accompanying Erdogan were a large number of Turkish businessmen who explored opportunities for joint projects with their Indian counterparts. The meeting was reminiscent of former President Turgut Ozal’s trips to Central Asia and the Balkans in the early 1990s, which helped facilitate the Turkish business community’s penetration into new markets, making the country more competitive in the global economy.

    Throughout his visit, Erdogan underlined the conditions that created a favorable environment for closer economic cooperation between the two countries. First, he noted that Turkey and India shared historical ties and that they had no current political problems with each other (Cihan News Agency, November 21).

    As a matter of fact, the Turkish people are sympathetic to the cause of the Kashmiri Muslims; and Turkey has traditionally maintained a close friendship with Pakistan, India’s archrival. Nonetheless, Turkey and India are not parties to a political dispute that might poison economic relations. Since the AKP government came to power in 2002, the trade volume between the two countries has almost quadrupled, reaching $2.6 billion in 2007 (Referans, November 19).

    Second, Erdogan emphasized Turkey’s role as a bridge between different continents and civilizations. He also said that Turkey, as a developing economy at the intersection of three continents, provided access to energy, trade and transportation routes, and major markets. He invited Indian businessmen to invest in Turkey and take advantage of the economic opportunities that Turkey provided (Anadolu Ajansi, November 21).

    Indian ambassador to Turkey Raminder S. Jassal spoke to Turkish journalists before Erdogan’s visit. His remarks, as well as those of other Indian politicians during Erdogan’s visit, clearly show that the Indians are aware of Turkey’s strategic position in the global economy. Echoing Erdogan’s positive views about the potential for improving bilateral relations, Jassal described Turkey as the “center of energy in the region.” He also outlined various projects that are currently under way as well as Indian companies’ plans to invest in Turkey (Today’s Zaman, November 18).

    Erdogan attended a Turkish-Indian business forum in New Delhi, which was sponsored by Turkey’s Foreign Economic Relations Council (DEIK). A report published by the DEIK on the status of trade and economic relations between Turkey and India noted that the major areas of cooperation were energy, tourism, and communications. Turkey seeks to attract a greater share of the increasing foreign investments of Indian firms. The report shows that Indian companies are interested in investing in mining, pharmaceuticals, construction, the automotive industry, energy, communications technology, and sugar production in Turkey. The report also pointed to trade inequality in bilateral relations: Turkey’s exports to India amounted to $545 million from January to September, while its imports reached $1.9 billion (Referans, November 19). It was noted, however, that since Turkey’s imports were mainly raw materials, the imbalance was not a major concern for the Turkish economy (Cihan News Agency, November 20).

    During his trip, Erdogan underlined both parties’ willingness to increase the trade volume to $6 billion by 2010. To this end, he said, the two countries had agreed to form a working group that would prepare the groundwork for the establishment of a free-trade zone between India and Turkey (www.ntvmsnbc.com, November 24).

    One spectacular joint project concerned energy transportation. India is eager to diversify its energy supplies and seek alternative routes to transport the oil it imports from Russia. Erdogan and Guler noted India’s interest in joining the Turkish-Israeli Med Stream project. The three countries had already started feasibility studies about connecting Turkey’s Ceyhan port to the Red Sea through a undersea pipeline and announced that the project might be completed by 2011 (Sabah, September 13). The project will carry Russian oil from the Turkish port of Samsun on the Black Sea to Ceyhan, feeding the Med Stream pipeline. This alternative could enable India to load Russian crude into tankers at an Israeli port. When the project is completed, it will reduce the transport time to India from 39 to 16 days, while cutting the shipping costs significantly. Guler added that he would meet his Israeli and Indian counterparts in the coming days to discuss this project further (www.cnnturk.com, November 24).

    The parties announced that they would increase cooperation in nuclear energy, which is significant given Turkey’s plans to build nuclear power plants and India’s experience in this area. They also noted their determination to join forces in fighting terrorism. Reflecting on their consensus on a broad range of issues, Erdogan said, “Turkey made a strategic decision to develop relations with India in all fields” (Zaman, November 23).