Category: Germany

With an estimated number of at least 2.1 million Turks in Germany, they form the largest ethnic minority. The vast majority are found in what used to be West Germany. Berlin, Frankfurt,Hamburg, Rhine-Ruhr (Cologne, Duisburg and Dortmund) have large Turkish communities. The state with the largest Turkish population is North Rhine-Westphalia.

  • Turkey fights to protect national anthem from German royalty claims

    Turkey fights to protect national anthem from German royalty claims

    ANKARA – Hürriyet Daily News

    national anthem to be made public property 2010 12 07 lA German musical group is demanding compensation for copyright infringement for İstiklal Marşı.

    The discovery that the Turkish national anthem, “İstiklal Marşı,” may be unprotected by copyright has sparked legislative efforts to make the song public property.

    A proposed bylaw to do so was opened for signatures during Monday’s Council of Ministers meeting, headed by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

    Turkey’s Culture Ministry is scrambling to legally protect the country’s national anthem after a German musical society demanded compensation for copyright infringement from a Turkish school in the European country that played the song.

    GEMA, a society for composers, songwriters and music publishers that focuses on music licensing, had demanded the royalties from a Turkish school in Germany that played the “İstiklal Marşı” during its Turkish National Sovereignty and Children’s Day celebrations in April 2007.

    When their initial objections to GEMA’s demand proved unsuccessful, school administrators contacted the Turkish Culture Ministry for help. At this point, it became clear that despite having been the Turkish national anthem for the past 89 years, “İstiklal Marşı” had never been put under legal copyright protection.

    Turkey’s Law on Intellectual Property states that a work is protected for 70 years after the death of the person who created it.

    The poet who penned the words to the Turkish anthem, Mehmet Akif Ersoy, died in 1936, while the score’s composer, Zeki Üngör, died in 1958. This means that if the intellectual property rights are applicable to national anthems, rights to the song would still belong to Üngör’s estate.

    In order for GEMA to demand royalty payments for the song, the request would have to come from Üngör’s heirs, said lawyer Hakan Hanlı, the legal consultant for the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review.

    “If the request came from the inheritors, than GEMA can legally demand the payments,” he said Hanlı. “If an existing law does not exist protecting the anthem, then it must be added to the Law on Intellectual Property as soon as possible.”

    The lawyer added that a Council of Ministers decision would not be enough to legally protect the anthem.

    Abdurrahman Çelik, the Culture Ministry’s director for copyright and cinema, told the Anatolia news agency last week that the issue should have been taken care of earlier, but had been either neglected or forgotten until now.

    “If foreigners ask us to whom the national anthem belongs, nobody would understand us if we said that it is ‘our national anthem,’” Çelik said. “The main point of the proposed bylaw is to define the rights to it, so no one can illegitimately demand royalties.”

  • Euro collapse ‘possible’ amid deepening divisions over bail-out

    Euro collapse ‘possible’ amid deepening divisions over bail-out

    It is feasible that the euro will not survive the current sovereign debt crisis sweeping Europe, one of the Treasury’s leading independent forecasters has said.

    Euro

    Under questioning from MPs on the Treasury Select Committee, Stephen Nickell, a member of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) and a former Bank of England rate-setter, said a collapse of the single currency was “a possibility”.

    Attempting to defy Germany, the eurozone’s powerhouse and the nation that will provide the bulk of any rescue fund, Belgian Finance Minister Didier Reynders called for the €440bn bail-out fund to be expanded, while Luxembourg Finance Minister Jean-Claude Juncker and Italian counterpart Giulio Tremonti outlined proposals for a joint European government bond.

    However, Germany, the Netherlands and Austria on Monday pitched themselves against weaker member states by insisting the rescue package should not be increased. Finance ministers from the 16 member nations were debating the bail-out plans late into the night.

    Mr Juncker and Mr Tremonti’s “E-Bonds” would be sold by a European Debt Agency, created as early as this month, to finance as much as 50pc of the issuances by EU members. For troubled members, like Ireland and Portugal, it could fund the entire bond issue.

    However, Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, quickly dashed hopes by rejecting the idea as unworkable and stating: “I see no need to expand the fund right now.”

    As market fears revived, the cost of insurance for Irish, Greek, Portuguese, Italian and Spanish sovereign debt rose. Bond yields were also higher as institutions shunned governments.

    Ireland, which faces a crucial vote on its debt reduction plans on Tuesday, offered some rare good news as the government appeared to have won sufficient parliamentary support to push the plans through and qualify for the €85bn bail-out package.

    On the euro, Mr Nickell said: “There is a possibility it will collapse but at the moment it is not something to which I subscribe a very high probability.” Asked to estimate the probability he said: “1.7pc”.

    Meanwhile, European Central Bank (ECB) Governing Council member Nout Wellink said it is not the central bank’s task to rescue euro-area countries with funding problems.

    “It’s not up to the ECB to save countries where governments run the risk of becoming insolvent,” Wellink, who also heads the Dutch central bank, said. “We are not here to take over, on our balance sheet, the risks of the national economies of Europe.”

    Ten-year bond yields

    Greece: 11.393 (+0.39)

    Ireland: 7.916 (+0.1)

    Portugal: 5.701 (-0.1)

    Spain: 5.080 (+0.9)

    Italy: 4.461 (+0.7)

    The Telegraph

  • WikiLeaks: Heated debate in Germany over nuclear weapons on its soil

    WikiLeaks: Heated debate in Germany over nuclear weapons on its soil

    Washington (CNN) — A proposal to reduce nuclear weapons highlighted the debate within the German government about when and how to get rid of nuclear weapons on its soil, a new WikiLeaks document shows.

    Its release also reveals the presence of nuclear weapons in several European countries and Turkey, information not normally released by NATO.

    During a meeting with two U.S. diplomats, German National Security Adviser Christoph Heusgen expressed his reservations about the German government coalition’s proposal to remove all tactical nuclear weapons from Germany, according to a November 2009 U.S. State Department cable published by WikiLeaks.

    In February, five countries — Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, and Norway — sent a joint letter to NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, signed by their respective foreign ministers, calling for a debate about NATO’s nuclear policy.

    German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle has called for the removal of all nuclear weapons from German soil. However, Heusgen distanced the German government from the proposal they had signed onto, claiming that “this had been forced upon them by FM Westerwelle,” the cable said.

    Heusgen told the U.S. diplomats that “from his perspective, it made no sense to unilaterally withdraw ‘the 20’ tactical nuclear weapons still in Germany while Russia maintains ‘thousands’ of them. It would only be worth it if both sides drew down,” the U.S. cable said.

    U.S. Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Philip H. Gordon responded by noting the importance of considering the potential consequences of a German proposal before moving forward. The cable continues, “a withdrawal of nuclear weapons from Germany and perhaps from Belgium and the Netherlands could make it very difficult politically for Turkey to maintain its own stockpile, even though it was still convinced of the need to do so.”

    Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, says the cable shows the intense deliberations going on in the German political process.

    “The new in that is that it shows the battle going on inside the German government between the foreign minister and other elements of the government on this issue of how to push this issue of tactical nuclear weapons within the alliance.”

    The Nuclear Threat Initiative defines tactical or nonstrategic nuclear weapons as “short-range weapons” which can include land-based missiles with a range of less than 500 kilometers (about 310 miles) and air- and sea-launched weapons with a range of less than 600 kilometers (about 370 miles). According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the United States has 500 tactical nuclear weapons in its arsenal, of which approximately 200 are deployed in Europe.

    The cable does not identify the origin of the nuclear weapons in any of the four countries, but the United States or NATO have military bases in all of them. According to Kristensen, these weapons are American. He points out that the British do not have tactical nuclear weapons, and the French keep their tactical nuclear weapons on their home soil.

    “We don’t comment on the placements of nuclear weapons,” NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu told CNN. “As a matter of policy, we don’t comment on leaked confidential documents of any sort. We think diplomats should be able to talk to each other in confidence, because otherwise there is a risk that tensions can get out of control.”

    As for Heusgen’s reference to “the 20” weapons on his country’s soil, Kristensen says it is not clear whether he is actually confirming that amount of weapons, or if he is using the estimate in a report written by Kristensen in 2005, which was picked up by German media and government officials as part of the debate. “Very few people in the German government know the exact number of weapons, and it’s not clear to me that the national security adviser would know.”

    On the coupling of German and Russian denuclearization proposed by Heusgen, Kristensen says that would make very little sense. “It would be very strange to see formal linking of very small number of weapons in Germany with the large inventory of tactical nuclear weapons Russia has in general. It’s apples and oranges. Russian tactical nuclear weapons, their location and their mission is not linked to whether there are nuclear weapons in Germany.”

    Kristensen estimates that Belgium, Netherlands and Germany each have between 10 and 20 tactical nuclear weapons on their soil, and there are 60 to 70 in Turkey.

    via WikiLeaks: Heated debate in Germany over nuclear weapons on its soil – CNN.com.

  • How Germany could come to kill the euro

    How Germany could come to kill the euro

    By Gideon Rachman

    Published: November 22 2010 20:34 | Last updated: November 22 2010 20:34

    “Tell me how this ends,” was the question posed by General David Petraeus about the Iraq war. European leaders are asking the same question as they contemplate the crisis in the eurozone.

    Having failed to construct a firebreak in Greece, the Europeans are hoping that they can stop the euro crisis in Ireland. But, even as an Irish rescue package is put together, the bond markets are already looking with unhealthy interest at Portugal. After Portugal, Spain is assumed to be next. And, if a really big economy such as Spain needed to call the financial fire brigade, the whole future of the euro would be in serious peril.

    The question of “how this ends” is therefore obvious and urgent – but also fiendishly difficult to answer. It is like watching a three-dimensional game of chess – in which the financial, economic and political levels all interact with each other.

    My current best guess is that the single currency will indeed eventually break up – and that the euro’s executioner will be Germany, the most powerful country and economy inside the European Union.

    The headline on one of the most-read stories in the Financial Times last week was “Anger at Germany boils over” – reporting accusations by some Europeans that the latest twist in the euro crisis had been triggered by inflexible German policies.

    But Germans themselves have plenty of reasons to be cross about the way the single currency is developing. Their country has been through a painful decade of wage restraint and cuts in government services. Many voters are outraged that their tax-euros might be used to finance early retirement for Greeks, or Ireland’s super-low corporate tax.

    Gideon Rachman blog

    Across the globe: Read the FT’s international affairs columnist’s authoritative and lively commentary

    The German people were also promised that the euro would be as stable as the Deutschmark – and that there would be a “no bail-out clause” that would prevent the richer countries in Europe having to save the indigent. Both promises look perilously close to being violated. That, in turn, is triggering growing concern that Germany’s constitutional court could declare their government’s participation in European “bail-outs” illegal.

    The German government’s fear of its own constitutional court has already been a crucial driver of the crisis. This year, the Germans were accused of acting far too slowly to organise a rescue for Greece. But official sloth was driven by a fear that speedy action would be deemed to violate the European treaties.

    The immediate crisis in Ireland was triggered about a month ago when Angela Merkel suggested that, in future euro crises, private bondholders should bear more of the losses and that further European treaty changes were needed. This remark was also made under pressure from the courts.

    Germany’s actions have, in turn, created political and legal pressures in bail-out nations. In Greece, we have seen deadly riots in Athens and a senior government minister evoking the Nazi occupation of the 1940s. In Ireland, there is much lamentation about the threat to national sovereignty. on Monday, the government itself was wobbling.

    It is possible that the rise of nationalist and anti-capitalist parties such as Ireland’s Sinn Féin will cause recipient countries to stick two fingers up to the EU – and to see whether life might be better outside the single currency. Countries such as Greece and Portugal might be a lot more competitive if they could devalue their currencies. But quitting the euro might feel like a national humiliation for members of the southern periphery. There is also no mechanism for quitting the euro in an orderly fashion. Any obvious preparations to do so might trigger a bank run.

    So if the euro is to break up, the country that sues for divorce is likely to be a strong economy – with Germany as the likeliest litigant. The Germans would not take this step quickly or lightly. A commitment to European integration has been a leitmotif of German foreign policy for half a century.

    But if the Germans became convinced that their eurozone partners were simply impossible to deal with – and that therefore the whole single currency experiment could not work – they might decide to quit. There are two ways I could imagine this happening.

    The first is a successive wave of financial crises across the eurozone, affecting larger countries, which gradually sap German taxpayer confidence that the “loans” that the EU is extending to its weaker members will ever be repaid. The second is if, as seems quite likely, the treaty changes that the German government is demanding to satisfy its courts fail to be ratified by some of the other 26 EU members. At that point, the Germans might throw up their hands and say, in effect, “Well, we tried our best, but the other Europeans won’t do what is necessary to save themselves.” Germany might then feel released from its historic obligation to “build Europe”.

    I realise that, in setting out these scenarios, I am laying supposition upon supposition. It only takes one point in the chain of argument to be wrong and events could charge off in another direction. All I would point out is that the optimists who put together the euro – and still argue that the currency will surmount its current problems – also made a lot of suppositions. And theirs don’t seem to be working out too well.

    gideon.rachman@ft.com

  • Turkey in the Axis of Radicalism? An Alternative View of Europe (Dedeoglu)

    Turkey in the Axis of Radicalism? An Alternative View of Europe (Dedeoglu)

    Sunday, November 14, 2010 at 7:32AM | Scott Lucas in EA Middle East and Turkey

    TURKEY EUWriting in Zaman, Professor Beril Dedeoglu of the University of Galatasaray in Istanbul intervenes in the discussion of whether Turkey has been aligning itself with non-Western powers under the rule of Justice and Development Party (AKP). Beyond questioning the existence of an ‘axis’, Dedeoglu asks if the real shift is occurring within the European Union, seeing a possible UK-French alliance v. a German-Russian front following a deep economic crisis:

    The term “axis shift” is used for countries that are supposedly changing their overall political positions, meaning that they abandon their current system of security and values to replace them with a new system.

    This term, which is used as a political tool, would have meaning if axes existed in the current global circumstances. Nevertheless, even if this political qualification is now used, it is not right to use it solely for Turkey; one must be able to test it elsewhere as well.

    The EU’s values and policies are dictated by the West’s stable and developed structures, which are marked by principles and rules. However, its practice does not always match the principle. The EU became what it is today because it has managed to regulate the rivalry between its members. Particularly in the security domain, rivalry has been thoroughly organized with every treaty and mechanism imaginable put in place in order to prevent one member state from becoming a security threat for another.

    However, the changing global conditions are pushing the member countries to progressively abandon the idea of mutual interdependence, which is at the basis of their partnership. Some serious problems have already started to appear, with the current economic and financial crisis stimulating debate over necessary reform in the security and defense architecture. Member states would like to reduce their defense spending without causing gaps in security, as they are afraid any such gap will be filled by the US.

    In order to find a solution, France and the UK have decided to make an agreement reminiscent of the Treaty of Dunkirk of 1947. For now, we do not know whether this will open a path to reunite the armed forces of these two countries, but we can say that this agreement symbolizes the beginning of a serious strategic cooperation. It is different from strategic cooperation initiatives witnessed elsewhere, such as the one between Turkey and Russia. The UK-France cooperation is more intense, and the two have not required a long process of confidence-building. It does not look like the cooperation between Turkey and Syria, either, as cooperation between the UK and France extends to the whole military domain rather than just a common fight against terrorism.

    Perhaps the first question to ask about the UK-France cooperation is which actors are expected to be disturbed by this rapprochement. History shows that we do not need to look far to get an answer. It seems that France has grown sufficiently away from de Gaulle’s approach to foreign policy and it is no longer filled with mistrust toward the UK. Maybe France hopes that an agreement with the UK will reduce Paris’ dependence on Germany. Such an effort risks replacing the German-French axis in Europe with another axis, one situated a little bit more to the north and with the US on one end. The UK’s new cabinet has already promised that they care about Europe more than their predecessors. Apparently they intend to keep that promise.

    If cooperation between France and the UK compels Germany to reinforce ties with Russia, then we will witness a real axis shift within the EU. If that happens, the debates on Turkey will also change as the “non à la Turquie” front collapses. The EU member countries may start competing with each other through Turkey, and some countries may stop refusing Turkey’s accession and while others increase their level of opposition.

    via EA WorldView – Home – Turkey in the Axis of Radicalism? An Alternative View of Europe (Dedeoglu).

  • Confiserie Orientale

    Confiserie Orientale

    A sweet new Turkish shop in Mitte…

    Photo by Paul Sullivan

    Photo by Paul Sullivan
    Photo by Paul Sullivan

    Observant Mitte regulars may have noticed a new Turkish shop appear recently on Linienstrasse, just across the road from popular bar-restaurant Schwarzwaldstuben.

    While ‘Turkish shop’ in Berlin traditionally means a new restaurant or imbiss, Confiserie Orientale is about as far away from a run-of-the-mill kebab stall as it’s possible to get. The store sells high quality Turkish Delight (or Lokum, as they’re traditionally known) alongside diverse Marzipan products made with almond, pistachio and fruits.

    Before you yawn and let your attention wander, you should know that that these particular sweets are not the sickly, overly saccharine, mass-produced stuff you’ve probably experienced in the past. Nuh-uh – these are hand-made, high-quality confections imported from a world renowned manufacturer in Istanbul called Cemilzade.

    Cemilzade has a long and distinguished history. The company was started back in 1883 by Udi Cemil Bey, who as well as being an able confectioner was also allegedly a talented composer, lute player and hafiz (a person who has committed the Koran to memory).

    Bey lived and died in Cairo but upon his death, his sons Mehmet Ali and Nurettin returned to Turkey and established a shop in Kadikoy, Istanbul.

    Today the company is still run by the same family (third and fourth generations) and Confiserie Orientale is their only official outlet in the whole of Europe. The shop is run by Istanbul-born Berlin intercultural-communicator Sevgi Guerez, who has taken her role as European ambassador for the company seriously, along with Berlin-based designer Claudia Medrow.

    Eschewing Oriental kitsch for the upmarket, arty minimalism of her immediate neighbourhood, Medrow has created a space every bit as sophisticated and appealing as the goods on sale, from the subtly whitened floorboards to the furniture she specially commissioned to resemble the 100 year + Istanbul originals.

    The main room consists of just a couple of chairs, a white wooden shelf featuring beautifully packaged collections of the Good Stuff and a cabinet-cum-counter that hosts a tiered platter of samples for customers to try out.

    The flavourings include rose and almond, mastic and marzipan and it’s a foregone conclusion that you’ll soon be scanning those shelves for something delectable to buy. Fortunately, with prices ranging from a reasonable e4.00 (100g) to e9.50 (250g), you won’t leave entirely bankrupt.

    Unless you’re buying something as a gift (ribbon-wrapping available) or want to share your treats around at home, we recommend you take a seat in the adjacent room – equally chic with white wooden tables, the lightest hint of Asiatic kitsch in the gold tiled stripe along the back wall and a long bench with cushions to relax on – and savour your Delights with a cup of authentic Turkish tea (served from a Samovar) or coffee.

    Confiserie Orientale

    Linienstrasse 113

    10115, Mitte

    Tel: 030-60 925 957

    Open: Tue – Fri 11 – 20, Sat – Sun 11- 18

    via Confiserie Orientale | Slow Travel Berlin.