Category: EU Members

European Council decided to open accession negotiations with Turkey on 17 Dec. 2004

  • The American-Western European Values Gap

    The American-Western European Values Gap

    American Exceptionalism Subsides

    The American-Western European Values Gap

    UPDATED FEBRUARY 29, 2012

    Survey Report

    As has long been the case, American values differ from those of Western Europeans in many important ways. Most notably, Americans are more individualistic and are less supportive of a strong safety net than are the publics of Britain, France, Germany and Spain. Americans are also considerably more religious than Western Europeans, and are more socially conservative with respect to homosexuality.

    Americans are somewhat more inclined than Western Europeans to say that it is sometimes necessary to use military force to maintain order in the world. Moreover, Americans more often than their Western European allies believe that obtaining UN approval before their country uses military force would make it too difficult to deal with an international threat. And Americans are less inclined than the Western Europeans, with the exception of the French, to help other nations.

    These differences between Americans and Western Europeans echo findings from previous surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center. However, the current polling shows the American public is coming closer to Europeans in not seeing their culture as superior to that of other nations. Today, only about half of Americans believe their culture is superior to others, compared with six-in-ten in 2002. And the polling finds younger Americans less apt than their elders to hold American exceptionalist attitudes.

    These are among the findings from a survey by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, conducted in the U.S., Britain, France, Germany and Spain from March 21 to April 14 as part of the broader 23-nation poll in spring 2011.

    Use of Military Force

    Three-quarters of Americans agree that it is sometimes necessary to use military force to maintain order in the world; this view is shared by seven-in-ten in Britain and narrower majorities in France and Spain (62% each). Germans are evenly divided, with half saying the use of force is sometimes necessary and half saying it is not.

    Germans are more supportive of the use of military force than they have been in recent years. For example, in 2007, just about four-in-ten (41%) Germans agreed that it was sometimes necessary, while 58% disagreed. Opinions have been more stable in the U.S., Britain and France.

    For the most part, opinions about the use of force do not vary considerably across demographic groups. In Germany and Spain, however, support for the use of military force is far more widespread among men than among women. Six-in-ten German men agree that it is sometimes necessary to use military force to maintain order in the world, compared with just 40% of women. And while majorities across gender groups in Spain believe the use of force may be necessary, more Spanish men than Spanish women say this is the case (68% vs. 56%).

    In Britain, France, Spain and the U.S., conservatives, or those on the political right, are more likely than liberals, or those on the left, to agree that the use of force is sometimes necessary to maintain world order. However, in the four countries, majorities across ideological groups express this view.1

    When asked whether their country should have UN approval before using military force to deal with international threats, American opinion differs considerably from that of Western Europeans. Americans are almost evenly divided on the question, with 45% saying that the U.S. should have UN approval while 44% say this would make it too difficult to deal with threats; in contrast, solid majorities in the four Western European nations surveyed, including about three-quarters in Spain (74%) and Germany (76%) say their country should have UN approval before it takes military action.

    In Western Europe, those with a college degree are more likely than those with less education to say their country should have UN approval before using military force, although majorities across both groups share this view. For example, in Spain, 84% of those who graduated from college say UN approval should be obtained, compared with 70% of those who do not have a college degree. Double-digit differences are also evident in Britain (15 percentage points), Germany (11 points) and France (10 points). This is not the case in the U.S., where respondents across education groups offer nearly identical views.

    In Germany, gender differences are also notable; even though German men are more likely than women to say the use of military force is sometimes necessary, more men than women say their country should have UN approval before using force (83% vs. 70%).

    The view that their country should have UN approval before using military force to deal with threats is far more prevalent among American liberals than among conservatives. Close to six-in-ten (57%) liberals favor obtaining UN approval, while 33% say this would make it too difficult for the U.S. to deal with threats; in contrast, most conservatives (52%) say getting UN approval would make it too difficult to deal with threats, while 38% say this is an important step. Political moderates fall between the other two groups, with 49% saying the U.S. should seek the approval of the UN before using military force and 42% saying this would make it too difficult to deal with threats. The same ideological difference is generally not evident in Western Europe.

    Views on International Engagement

    About four-in-ten (39%) Americans say the U.S. should help other countries deal with their problems, while a narrow majority (52%) says the U.S. should deal with its own problems and let other countries deal with their problems as best they can. In this regard, Americans are not drastically different from respondents in France, where 43% believe their country should help other countries and 57% say it should focus on its own problems.

    The British are nearly evenly divided; 45% say their country should help other countries deal with their problems and about the same number (48%) believe Britain should deal with its own problems.

    Compared with the U.S., France and Britain, Spain and Germany stand out as the only countries where majorities favor international engagement: 55% and 54%, respectively, say their countries should provide assistance to others, while 40% in Spain and 43% in Germany take the more isolationist view.

    Opinions about international engagement have changed somewhat in the U.S., France and Spain since last year, but while publics in the two Western European countries are now more in favor of helping others than they were in 2010, more Americans currently take an isolationist position. Last year, about the same number of Americans said their country should help other countries (45%) as said it should let other countries deal with their own problems (46%). Similarly, the Spanish were nearly evenly divided, with 49% favoring engagement and 47% taking an isolationist approach. In France, where a majority continues to take an isolationist view, even more (65%) did so a year ago.

    In the U.S. as well as in the four Western European countries surveyed, those with a college degree are far more likely than those with less education to offer an internationalist view. This is especially the case in Germany, where about three-quarters (73%) of those who graduated from college believe their country should help other countries deal with their problems, compared with a narrow majority (52%) of those without a college degree.

    Political ideology is also a factor in Germany, France and Spain. In these three countries, those on the right are more likely than those on the left to take the isolationist view when it comes to international engagement. For example, while about half (48%) of left-wing French say their country should deal with its own problems and let other countries deal with theirs as best they can, about six-in-ten (59%) on the right offer this opinion.

    Cultural Superiority

    About half of Americans (49%) and Germans (47%) agree with the statement, “Our people are not perfect, but our culture is superior to others;” 44% in Spain share this view. In Britain and France, only about a third or fewer (32% and 27%, respectively) think their culture is better than others.

    While opinions about cultural superiority have remained relatively stable over the years in the four Western European countries surveyed, Americans are now far less likely to say that their culture is better than others; six-in-ten Americans held this belief in 2002 and 55% did so in 2007. Belief in cultural superiority has declined among Americans across age, gender and education groups.

    As in past surveys, older Americans remain far more inclined than younger ones to believe that their culture is better than others. Six-in-ten Americans ages 50 or older share this view, while 34% disagree; those younger than 30 hold the opposite view, with just 37% saying American culture is superior and 61% saying it is not. Opinions are more divided among those ages 30 to 49; 44% in this group see American culture as superior and 50% do not.

    Similar age gaps are not as common in the Western European countries surveyed, with the exception of Spain, where majorities of older respondents, but not among younger ones, also think their culture is better than others; 55% of those ages 50 or older say this is the case, compared with 34% of those ages 30 to 49 and 39% of those younger than 30.

    As is the case on other measures, opinions about cultural superiority vary considerably by educational attainment. In the four Western European countries and in the U.S., those who did not graduate from college are more likely than those who did to agree that their culture is superior, even if their people are not perfect. For example, Germans with less education are about twice as likely as those with a college degree to believe their culture is superior (49% vs. 25%); double-digit differences are also present in France (20 percentage points), Spain (18 points) and Britain (11 points), while a less pronounced gap is evident in the U.S. (9 points).

    Finally, among Americans and Germans, political conservative are especially likely to believe their culture is superior to others. In the U.S., 63% of conservatives take this view, compared with 45% of moderates and just 34% of liberals. Similarly, a majority (54%) of right-wing Germans see their culture as superior, while 47% of moderates and 33% of those on the political left agree.

    Individualism and the Role of the State

    American opinions continue to differ considerably from those of Western Europeans when it comes to views of individualism and the role of the state. Nearly six-in-ten (58%) Americans believe it is more important for everyone to be free to pursue their life’s goals without interference from the state, while just 35% say it is more important for the state to play an active role in society so as to guarantee that nobody is in need.

    In contrast, at least six-in-ten in Spain (67%), France (64%) and Germany (62%) and 55% in Britain say the state should ensure that nobody is in need; about four-in-ten or fewer consider being free from state interference a higher priority.

    In the U.S., Britain, France and Germany, views of the role of the state divide significantly across ideological lines. For example, three-quarters of American conservatives say individuals should be free to pursue their goals without interference from the state, while 21% say it is more important for the state to guarantee that nobody is in need; among liberals in the U.S., half would like the state to play an active role to help the needy, while 42% prefer a more limited role for the state.

    Those on the political right in Britain, France and Germany are also more likely than those on the left in these countries to prioritize freedom to pursue one’s goals without state interference. Unlike in the U.S., however, majorities of those on the right in France (57%) and Germany (56%) favor an active role for the state, as do more than four-in-ten (45%) conservatives in Britain.

    American opinions about the role of the state also vary considerably across age groups. About half (47%) of those younger than 30 prioritize the freedom to pursue life’s goals without interference from the state and a similar percentage (46%) say it is more important for the state to ensure that nobody is in need; among older Americans, however, about six-in-ten consider being free a higher priority, with just about three-in-ten saying the state should play an active role so that nobody is in need. No such age difference is evident in the four Western European countries surveyed.

    Asked if they agree that “success in life is pretty much determined by forces outside our control,” Americans again offer more individualistic views than those expressed by Western Europeans. Only 36% of Americans believe they have little control over their fate, compared with 50% in Spain, 57% in France and 72% in Germany; Britain is the only Western European country surveyed where fewer than half (41%) share this view.

    In the U.S. and in Western Europe, those without a college degree are less individualistic than those who have graduated from college; this is especially the case in the U.S. and Germany. About three-quarters (74%) of Germans in the less educated group believe that success in life is largely determined by forces beyond one’s control, compared with 55% of college graduates. Among Americans, 41% of those without a college degree say they have little control over their fate, while just 22% of college graduates share this view.

    Religion More Important to Americans

    Americans also distinguish themselves from Western Europeans on views about the importance of religion. Half of Americans deem religion very important in their lives; fewer than a quarter in Spain (22%), Germany (21%), Britain (17%) and France (13%) share this view.

    Moreover, Americans are far more inclined than Western Europeans to say it is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values; 53% say this is the case in the U.S., compared with just one-third in Germany, 20% in Britain, 19% in Spain and 15% in France.

    In the U.S., women and older respondents place more importance on religion and are more likely than men and younger people to say that faith in God is a necessary foundation for morality and good values. About six-in-ten (59%) American women say religion is very important in their lives, compared with 41% of men; and while a majority (56%) of Americans ages 50 and older say religion is very important to them, 48% of those ages 30 to 49 and 41% of those younger than 30 place similar importance on religion.

    Similarly, while a majority of American women (58%) say it is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values, men are nearly evenly divided, with 47% saying belief in God is a necessary foundation for morality and 51% saying it is not. Among Americans ages 50 and older, 58% say one must believe in God in order to be moral and have good values; 50% of those ages 30 to 49 and 46% of those younger than 30 share this view.

    Education also plays a role in views of religion in the U.S., to some extent. Although Americans with a college degree are about as likely as those without to say religion is very important to them (47% and 51%, respectively), the less educated are far more inclined to say that one must believe in God in order to be moral; 59% of those without a college degree say this, compared with 37% of those who have graduated from college.

    Views of religion and whether belief in God is a necessary foundation for morality vary little, if at all, across demographic groups in the Western European countries surveyed. In Spain, however, respondents ages 50 and older place more importance on religion than do younger people, although relatively few in this age group say it is very important to them; 33% say this is the case, compared with 16% of those ages 30 to 49 and 11% of those younger than 30.

    Politically, conservatives in the U.S., Spain and Germany are more likely than liberals to say it is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values, but while solid majorities of conservatives in the U.S. (66%) take this position, fewer than half of conservatives in Spain (31%) and Germany (46%) share this view. Meanwhile, just 26% of liberals in the U.S., 11% in Spain and 19% in Germany say belief in God is a necessary foundation for morality. Conservatives in the U.S. are also far more likely than liberals to consider religion very important in their lives (67% vs. 29%); in Western Europe, few across ideological groups place high importance on religion.

    Religious vs. National Identity

    American Christians are more likely than their Western European counterparts to think of themselves first in terms of their religion rather than their nationality; 46% of Christians in the U.S. see themselves primarily as Christians and the same number consider themselves Americans first. In contrast, majorities of Christians in France (90%), Germany (70%), Britain (63%) and Spain (53%) identify primarily with their nationality rather than their religion.

    In Britain, France and Germany, more Christians now see themselves in terms of their nationality than did so five years ago, when national identification was already widespread in these countries. This change is especially notable in Germany, where the percentage seeing themselves first as Germans is up 11 percentage points, from 59% in 2006.

    Among Christians in the U.S., white evangelicals are especially inclined to identify first with their faith; 70% in this group see themselves first as Christians rather than as Americans, while 22% say they are primarily American. Among other American Christians, more identify with their nationality (55%) than with their religion (38%).

    Homosexuality

    Tolerance for homosexuality is widespread in the U.S. and Western Europe, but far more Western Europeans than Americans say homosexuality should be accepted by society; at least eight-in-ten in Spain (91%), Germany (87%), France (86%) and Britain (81%), compared with 60% in the U.S.

    Acceptance of homosexuality has increased in recent years, and the shift is especially notable in the U.S., where only slightly more said it should be accepted (49%) than said it should be rejected (41%) in 2007. Today, more Americans accept homosexuality than reject it by a 27-percentage point margin.

    While there are some differences in opinions of homosexuality across demographic groups in the Western European countries surveyed, overwhelming majorities across age, education and gender groups believe homosexuality should be accepted by society. In the U.S., however, these differences are somewhat more pronounced. For example, while 67% of American women believe homosexuality should be accepted, a much narrower majority of men (54%) share that view. Among Americans with college degrees, 71% accept homosexuality, compared with 56% of those with less education. Finally, about two-thirds (68%) of Americans younger than 30 say homosexuality should be accepted by society; 61% of those ages 30 to 40 and 55% of those ages 50 and older share this view.

    In addition to demographic differences, an ideological divide on views of homosexuality is also notable in the U.S., where more than eight-in-ten (85%) liberals and 65% of moderates express tolerant views, compared with 44% of conservatives. In the four Western European countries surveyed, at least three-quarters across ideological groups say homosexuality should be accepted by society.

    1. In the U.S., respondents were asked, “In general, would you describe your political views as very conservative, conservative, moderate, liberal or very liberal?” In Western Europe, respondents were asked, “Some people talk about politics in terms of left, center and right. On a left-right scale from 0 to 6, with 0 indicating extreme left and 6 indicating extreme right, where would you place yourself?” Throughout this report, we use the terms left/liberal and right/conservative interchangeably. In the U.S., an analysis of partisan differences shows that, for the most part, the views of Democrats align with those of liberals, while views of Republicans mirror those of conservatives; we refer to ideology rather than partisanship for a more direct comparison between Americans and Western Europeans. ↩

    2011 VALUES0014

    Source :

  • Greece ‘most corrupt’ EU country, new survey reveals

    Greece ‘most corrupt’ EU country, new survey reveals

    greeceGreece is perceived to have the most corrupt public sector of all 27 EU countries,a new global survey reveals.

    Worldwide, Denmark, Finland and New Zealand were seen as the least corrupt nations, while Afghanistan, North Korea and Somalia were perceived to be the most corrupt.

    Transparency International’s 2012 Corruption Perceptions Index gathered views on 176 countries worldwide.

    Two-thirds scored below 50, with zero highly corrupt and 100 very clean.

    The UK ranked 17th in the world, with a score of 74.

    Greece’s global ranking fell from 80th in 2011 to 94th in 2012, reflecting the country’s continuing economic turmoil and widespread tax evasion.

    Italy was ranked 72nd, below EU-newcomer Romania at 66 in the index.

    “Governments need to integrate anti-corruption actions into all public decision-making”, said Huguette Labelle, chair of Transparency International (TI), a body set up in 1993 to expose and tackle countrywide corruption.

    “Priorities include better rules on lobbying and political financing, making public spending and contracting more transparent and making public bodies more accountable to people.”

    TI believes there are strong correlations between poverty, conflict and perceived levels of corruption.

     

     

     

    BBC

  • REMINDER / HATIRLATMA: David Burrowes MP/ Milletvekili

    REMINDER / HATIRLATMA: David Burrowes MP/ Milletvekili

    David Burrowes MP who is known as the Fanatic Greek Cypriot Supporter
    David Burrowes MP who is known as the Fanatic Greek Cypriot Supporter

    > English
    >
    >
    > Throughout the years, many British MPs have taken a one-sided view
    > against Turkish Cypriots regarding the Cyprus issue.  David
    > Burrowes, the MP for Enfield-Southgate, is a perfect example of this
    > conduct.  He is the Chairperson of the All party Parliamentary Group

    > for Cyprus (APPG), an influential body in the UK’s Cyprus affairs, but
    > we feel that his representation of Cypriot affairs to the House of
    > Commons is far from balanced.  He conveniently chooses to ignore the
    > facts and his false accusations and incorrect statements are
    > misleading.  As head of the APPG he claims to represent both
    > communities whilst openly adopting the views and positions of Greek
    > Cypriot lobbyists; the fact that not a single speaker has appeared at
    > an APPG event to explain the concerns and views of Turkish Cypriots
    > speaks volumes.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > As Chairperson of the APPG, David Burrowes is in a strong position to
    > influence other MPs in order to take a pro Greek Cypriot stance.  This
    > renders his position untenable as he continues to ignore the
    > legitimate concerns of the UK’s Turkish Cypriots.  He is not
    > interested in our views and we therefore request that the Minister for
    > Europe and APPG members for Cyprus ask David Burrowes to resign from
    > his position with immediate effect, and a new Chairperson who
    > is willing to take on board and represent the views of Turkish
    > Cypriots which have been ignored for far too long.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >    We all wish to see constructive and decisive action by midday on
    >  Wednesday 28th November 2012 and in anticipation we have taken this
    >  opportunity to show unity by way of a collective letter addressed to
    >  the Minister for Europe, David Liddington and to all members of the
    >                Cyprus All Party Parliamentary Group.
    >
    >
    >
    > The British Turkish Cypriot Association (BTCA) would like to formally
    >    invite you/your organisation to join us in this JOINT action.
    >
    >
    >
    >  IF YOU WISH TO SUPPORT THIS LETTER, PLEASE EMAIL:  [email protected]
    >  with your full personal name and title and the name of the NGO you
    >                              represent
    >
    >
    >
    >    The closing date to notify us of your wish to be included as a
    >      signatory is midday (GMT) on Wednesday 28th November 2012.
    >
    >
    >
    >  ***Many thanks to all those people who have already indicated that
    >  they wish to have their names included as joint signatories and who
    >        have also helped in the preparation of this statement***
    >

    >

    Türkce
    >
    >
    > Yıllar boyunca birçok Britanyalı Parlamenter, Kıbrıs konusunda
    > Kıbrıslı Türklerin görüşlerine karşı tek yanlı davranmışlardır. Bu
    > konuda Enfield-Southgate Milletvekili olan David Burrowes çok iyi
    > bir örnektir. Kendisi, Birleşik Kraliyet’nin Kıbrıs siyasetinde sözü
    > geçen Karma Parlamenterler Kıbrıs Grup Başkanıdır (All Party
    > Parliamentary Group for Cyprus – APPG). Biz bu şahısın Kıbrıs konusunu
    > parlamentoya dengeli bir şekilde yansıtmaktan çok uzak olduğuna
    > inanıyoruz. Kıbrıs’taki mevcut gerçekleri gözardı ederek, sahte ve
    > yanlış demeçler vermektedir. Karma Parlamenterler Kıbrıs Grubu (KPKG)
    > Başkanı olarak, her iki Kıbrıslı toplumu temsil ettiğini iddia
    > etmesine rağmen, açıkca sadece Kıbrıs Rum lobicilerinin görüşlerini
    > kabul etmektedir. Hatta  KıbrıslıTürklerin görüşlerini de almak üzere
    > tek bir kişinin KPKG’ye davet edilmemesi çok manidardır.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > KPKG Başkanı olarak, David Burrowes diğer Milletvekillerinin de Kıbrıs
    > Rum yanlısı bir tavır almaları için etkin bir pozisyona sahiptir.
    > Birleşik Kraliyetinde yaşayan Kıbrıslı Türklerin meşru endişelerini
    > gözardı ederek sözkonusu Grup Başkanlık müdafaasını imkansız
    > kılmaktadır. Kendisi bizim görüşlerimizle ilgilenmediği için Avrupa
    > Bakanı ve KPKG üyelerinden David Burrowes’ın sözkonusu Başkanlıktan
    > derhal istifasını talep etmeleri ve onun yerine, çoktan beri dikkate
    > alınmayan Kıbrıslı Türklerinin görşlerine de saygı duyan yeni bir
    > Başkanın seçilmesi için çağrıda bulunuyoruz. Bu konuda Çarşamba 28
    > Kasım 2012 öğle vaktine kadar yapıcı ve kesin kararların alınmasını
    > bekliyoruz. Bu yönde birlik ve beraberliğimizi göstermek amacıyla
    > hepimiz adına başta Avrupa Bakanı ve Milletvekili David Liddington
    > olmak üzere, tüm KPKG üyelerine bir mektup yazmış bulunuyoruz.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Britanyalı Kıbrıslı Türk Birliği olarak sizleri ve örgütünüzü bizimle
    >                  ortak hareket etmeye davet ediyoruz.
    >
    >
    >
    >    Eğer bu mektuba desteğinizi vermek istiyorsanız [email protected]
    >  e-mail adresine, isim, soy isminizi, ünvanınızı ve temsil ettiğiniz
    >            sivil toplum örgütünün ismini verebilirsiniz.
    >
    >
    >
    >    Sözkonusu mektubun altına sizin de isminizin kaydedilmesini arzu
    > ederseniz, Çarşamba 28 Kasım 2012 öğle vaktine kadar bize bildirmeniz
    >                              gerekiyor.
    >
    >
    >
    > ***Şimdiye kadar bize isimlerini göndererek ve mektubun hazırlanışında
    >      destek veren tüm şahıslara ve örgütlere teşekkür ederiz.***
    >
    >
    >

     

  • Recep Tayyip Erdogan: Turkey’s economy meets EU membership criteria

    Recep Tayyip Erdogan: Turkey’s economy meets EU membership criteria

    Since 2002, Turkey’s growth strategy, fiscal discipline, and structural reforms have helped it become the world’s 16th largest economy. Last year, Turkey’s figures for growth, public borrowing, long-term debt, and unemployment were vastly better than Europe’s.

    By Recep Tayyip Erdogan / November 29, 2012

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, followed by Spain’s Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, as they arrive for a press conference in Madrid Nov. 27. Mr. Erdogan says in this op-ed: ‘All of [our positive economic] indicators point to the fact that Turkey would actually fulfill the Maastricht criteria for entry into the eurozone, unlike many present member states.’

    Daniel Ochoa de Olza/AP

    Enlarge

    Share on stumbleupon Share on email

    Berlin

    Until recently Turkey was a country that had to borrow from the IMF. But positive developments over the last 10 years have led Turkey to become a country that now lends to the IMF instead.

    1129 Turkey s Erdogan meets with Spain PM in Madrid full 380

     

    Our ability to do this is a result of policies of fiscal discipline we have implemented since our own crisis in 2001. In the past, we had debts to the IMF of $20 billion. Now, that is down to $1.7 billion. Our central bank has reserves of $115 billion.

    The crisis we have gone through was similar to what the EU is experiencing now. Many banks went bankrupt. People’s savings disappeared. Companies closed down. The Turkish economy shrank drastically.

    OPINION: In shifting sands of Middle East, who will lead? (+ video)

    That crisis was a very important lesson for us. Since 2002 our government has pursued a strategy of growth along with fiscal discipline – which is why we’ve reach the level we are at today.

    In order not to go through a crisis like 2001 once again, we have also carried out structural reforms – ranging from timely and decisive banking reform to changes in health care and social services – that not only strengthened the Turkish economy but also increased the confidence of the Turkish people in their government.

    As a result, Turkey has climbed to the rank of the world’s 16th largest economy. Last year our economy grew at 8.5 percent – one of the fastest rates in the world. By comparison, Europe only grew by 1.5 percent last year. Over the last nine months there was no growth at all in Europe taken as a whole, with GDP actually shrinking in some places.

    In Europe in general, public borrowing in annual budgets has grown to 4.5 percent of GDP, while in Turkey it has fallen to 1.7 percent.

    Overall, long-term debt in Europe amounted last year to 85 percent of GDP, while in Turkey it was only 37 percent.

    Unemployment in Turkey is at 8.5 percent. Overall in Europe it was 10.5 percent as of August 2011.

    OPINION: Time has come for a ‘United States of Europe’ – that includes Turkey

    All of these indicators point to the fact that Turkey would actually fulfill the Maastricht criteria for entry into the eurozone, unlike many present member states. [For example, the Maastricht Treaty stipulates that a country’s debt should not exceed 60 percent of GDP, and borrowing in annual budgets should not exceed 3 percent of GDP.]

    The success and resilience of Turkey today is due to the structural reforms we have undertaken since 2002 and because we have stuck to a sensible fiscal and budgetary policy with the proper discipline.

    Of course, none of this was easy. The austerity policies were very hard to implement.

    In light of the current troubles in Europe, we learned one very important lesson as we implemented these tough reforms: The people need to be able to trust those who govern them and not feel that their interests are being betrayed. Without that trust, we would not have been able to make the very difficult readjustments in our social security system.

    For all these reasons, Turkey today is strong and resilient. But there is more to be done to improve our performance and build proactively on this foundation.

    ANOTHER VIEW: Questions about Turkey as a democracy and military model

    We have just finalized our planning for the future and are taking the next steps. By 2023, we want Turkey to be one of the top 10 economic areas of the world. In the last 10 years we managed to increase the per capita income threefold. Over the next 15 years we want to increase per capita income from $10,500 to $25,000. That would require a growth rate of 5.2 percent over the next five years.

    Recep Tayyip Erdogan is the prime minister of Turkey. His remarks are excerpted from a recent speech to the Berggruen Institute on Governance in Berlin.

    via Recep Tayyip Erdogan: Turkey’s economy meets EU membership criteria – CSMonitor.com.

  • Kuveyt Turk aims to become Germany’s first Islamic bank in 2013

    Kuveyt Turk aims to become Germany’s first Islamic bank in 2013

    By Seda Sezer and Ebru Tuncay

    ISTANBUL | Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:24am EST

    Nov 28 (Reuters) – Kuwait Finance House’s Turkish unit Kuveyt Turk has applied for a German banking licence and aims to become the first Islamic bank in Europe’s largest economy, Chief Executive Ufuk Uyan told Reuters in an interview.

    Kuveyt Turk – which issued a $350 million sukuk, or Islamic bond, last year – is awaiting a response from German financial watchdog BaFin but hopes the application process will be completed next year, Uyan said.

    “We are trying to obtain a full banking license,” he told Reuters in his office in Istanbul. “We plan to open branches in Germany and if this model becomes successful we could consider going to other European countries.”

    Uyan said Kuveyt Turk planned to invest initial capital of 45 million euros ($58 million) in its planned German unit.

    ($1 = 0.7733 euros) (Writing by Seda Sezer; Editing by Nick Tattersall)

    via Kuveyt Turk aims to become Germany’s first Islamic bank in 2013-CEO | Reuters.

  • Britain ready to back Palestinian statehood at UN

    Britain ready to back Palestinian statehood at UN

    Mahmoud Abbas pledge not to pursue Israel for war crimes and resumption of peace talks are UK conditions

    Ian Black, Middle East editor

    Palestinians hold posters
    Palestinians hold posters of President Mahmoud Abbas during a rally supporting the UN bid for observer state status, in the West Bank city of Ramallah. Photograph: APAimages/Rex Features

    Britain is prepared to back a key vote recognising Palestinian statehood at the United Nations if Mahmoud Abbas pledges not to pursue Israel for war crimes and to resume peace talks.

    Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, has called for Britain’s backing in part because of its historic responsibility for Palestine. The government has previously refused, citing strong US and Israeli objections and fears of long-term damage to prospects for negotiations.

    On Monday night, the government signalled it would change tack and vote yes if the Palestinians modified their application, which is to be debated by the UN general assembly in New York later this week. As a “non-member state”, Palestine would have the same status as the Vatican.

    Whitehall officials said the Palestinians were now being asked to refrain from applying for membership of the international criminal court or the international court of justice, which could both be used to pursue war crimes charges or other legal claims against Israel.

    Abbas is also being asked to commit to an immediate resumption of peace talks “without preconditions” with Israel. The third condition is that the general assembly’s resolution does not require the UN security council to follow suit.

    The US and Israel have both hinted at possible retaliation if the vote goes ahead. Congress could block payments to the Palestinian Authority and Israel might freeze tax revenues it transfers under the 1993 Oslo agreement or, worse, withdraw from the agreement altogether. It could also annex West Bank settlements. Britain’s position is that it wants to reduce the risk that such threats might be implemented and bolster Palestinian moderates.

    France has already signalled that it will vote yes on Thursday, and the long-awaited vote is certain to pass as 132 UN members have recognised the state of Palestine. Decisions by Germany, Spain and Britain are still pending and Palestinians would clearly prefer a united EU position as counterweight to the US.

    Willian Hague, the foreign secretary, discussed the issue on Monday with Abbas and the French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, offiicals said.

    Palestinian sources said Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, raised the issue with Abbas at his Ramallah headquarters last week, shortly before a ceasefire was agreed in the Gaza Strip, as had Tony Blair, the Quartet envoy.

    Abbas has been widely seen to have been sidelined by his rivals in the Islamist movement Hamas, as well by his failure to win any concessions from Israel. Abbas, whose remit does not extend beyond the West Bank, hopes a strong yes vote will persuade Israel to return to talks after more than two years.

    Officals in Ramallah have opposed surrendering on the ICC issue so it can be used as a bargaining chip in future, but views are thought to be divided. Abbas said at the weekend: “We are going to the UN fully confident in our steps. We will have our rights because you are with us.”

    Leila Shaid, Palestine’s representative to the EU, said: “After everything that has happened in the Arab spring, Britain can’t pretend it is in favour of democracy in Libya, Syria and Egypt but accept the Palestinians continuing to live under occupation. As the former colonial power, Britain has a historic responsibility to Palestine. Britain is a very important country in the Middle East, it has extensive trade relations, and David Cameron should know he risks a popular backlash from Arab public opinion if he does not support us.”

    Palestinians have rejected the claim that they are acting unilaterally, calling the UN path “the ultimate expression of multilateralism”. Israel’s apparent opposition to unilateralism has not stopped it acting without agreement to build and expand settlements, they say.

    guardian.co.uk,