Turkish President Abdullah Gul met with British Prime Minister David Cameron on Monday as part of his visit to the United Kingdom.
The closed-door meeting lasted for about 45 minutes.
President Gul is currently in London to receive Chatham House prize.
Gul will deliver a speech at the Chatham House on Turkey, Europe and the international system in the first quarter of the 21st century later in the day.
He will also attend a conference on democracy and development in Islam world at the University of Oxford.
On Tuesday, Gul will inaugurate Yunus Emre Foundation’s Turkish Culture Center and Architect Sinan Exhibition in London.
A Turkish poet and Sufi mystic, Yunus Emre was one of the first known Turkish poets to have composed works in the spoken Turkish of his own age and region rather than in Persian or Arabic. His diction remains very close to the popular speech of his contemporaries in Central and Western Anatolia. His poems, written in the tradition of Anatolian folk poetry, mainly concern divine love as well as human destiny.
Mimar (Architect) Sinan was the chief Ottoman architect and civil engineer for sultans Suleyman I, Selim II, and Murad III. He was responsible for the construction of more than three hundred major structures, including Selimiye Mosque in Edirne and Suleymaniye Mosque in Istanbul.
Gul is expected to depart from Britain on Tuesday evening.
‘Chatham House award symbol of Turkey’s resilience’
Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II presents the Chatham House Prize to Turkish President Abdullah Gül. President Abdullah Gül praised Turkey’s achievements in the past decade right after he received the prestigious Chatham House Award late on Tuesday, saying that the award he received honors the “resilience” of the Turkish nation.
Queen Elizabeth II presented the award during a ceremony, praising the president’s “notable leadership” for improving international relations.
“I accept this award with profound honor and humbleness on behalf of my beloved country and the people of Turkey,” President Gül said as he accepted the award. “Although I take personal pride in receiving it, the award presented to me tonight truly acknowledges the progress achieved by the Turkish nation in recent years despite many internal and external difficulties,” he added.
Noting that the prize also honors the resilience and perseverance of a people who have never lost their aspiration for progress and hope in a better future, Gül said all witnessed “a silent revolution” in democratic, social and economic standards that is taking place in Turkey’s quest for full membership in the European Union.
According to the president, the prize signifies the role played by Turkey in its multidimensional neighborhood and beyond, where the country nurtures peace, stability and welfare. Praising Turkey’s inspiring role in the Islamic world as a vibrant democracy and a flourishing free-market economy, Gül said the prize symbolizes the success of a hard-working people, whose “sweat was key to making Turkey the fastest growing economy among the OECD members this year,” the president stressed.
Finally, Gül said, the award that he received thoroughly certifies, once again, the eternal friendship between Turkey and the United Kingdom, whose alliance and cooperation made a huge difference in history and are destined to offer even more promising prospects in the future. The queen, while presenting the Turkish president the award, said she was delighted to welcome the president and his spouse to London to receive this important award.
“Mr. President, I remember with gratitude your very kind hospitality during my state visit to Turkey in 2008,” the queen said, adding that Gül had provided “notable leadership” and “international statesmanship” over many years. She offered her congratulations by presenting this award on behalf of the Royal Institute of International Affairs. The queen also praised Gül for his efforts to secure Turkey’s place in the 27-nation bloc and to improve the level of democracy and human rights in his country.
Turkish President Abdullah Gül suggested on Monday that Turkey is already playing an active part in shaping the future international order that will replace the three-dimensionally “imperfect equilibrium” that characterizes the current state of affairs after the Cold War.
Gül was speaking at Chatham House, the British think tank that will today present Gül with its prestigious Chatham House Prize from the hands of the Queen. During his speech titled “International System, Europe and Turkey in the first quarter of the 21st century,” Gül suggested that the Cold War era world system was yet to be replaced by a new and normal system that will manage international relations effectively. Gül compared the current situation to a three-dimensional “imperfect equilibrium” where the normalcy has to be attained in political, economic and finally social and humanitarian issues.
Gül reiterated his position about the imperfectness of the current equilibrium in the political sphere by referring to the newly emerging power centers like Russia, China, India and Brazil and to the changing and expanding understanding of security in the new era. On the economic front, Gül pointed to the huge deficits of the developed market economies and the rising economies with fast growth rates and large sovereign funds emanating from current account surpluses. He didn’t specify the shortcomings and deficits of the current international structure in terms of social and humanitarian values, but chose to say that they are “obvious.”
President Gül suggested that the new and normal order will be accomplished in the next decade and shared his thoughts about the main characteristics of the new normal international order. He suggested that this new order must address the three-dimensional deficits and that the new order countries would not be categorized as First, Second and Third World countries. Gül added that this new order must focus on the whole world and reject a Euro-centric understanding of history and international affairs. He suggested that in this order, principles and goals must prevail over club membership reflexes and that instead of an order in which winners are rewarded and losers are punished, the new order should enable us to win the hearts and minds of the defeated. Gül said that the new order must be a multicultural, multi-dimensional, heterogeneous but harmonized one where a single power’s hegemony is refused and where people distinguish themselves not by bearing symbols but qualifications, and express themselves not with rhetoric but with their deeds.
In his speech, President Gül also claimed that Turkey has been doing its part in shaping the world towards such a new and normal order by exemplifying the zero-problem policy as an alternative to the zero-sum game of the Cold War era.
In London, Gül also had a 45-minute meeting with British Prime Minister David Cameron. There was no immediate statement after the talks. Cameron is a staunch supporter of Turkey’s accession into the EU and, in a speech during a visit to Turkey in July, he promised to “fight” for Turkey’s accession. “My view is clear. I believe it is just wrong to say that Turkey can guard the camp but not be allowed to sit in the tent,” he said in a speech at the Turkish Parliament.
On Monday, Gül also gave a speech on “The Islamic World, Democracy and Development,” at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, where Gül is also a member of the board.
Red Book rewritten, not revised
Gül also commented on some of the key issues in Turkish foreign policy while speaking to reporters on Sunday evening. Gül, responding to a question, said the recent revision of Turkey’s National Security Policy Document (MGSB), a classified document that outlines national security priorities, amounted to a complete rewriting. “It is not that some of the articles have been revised. The whole document has been rewritten,” Gül said, explaining that the former version of the MGSB reflected the realities of the Cold War era. The MGSB, commonly referred to as the Red Book, has been amended to remove Turkey’s immediate neighbors from a list of nations considered as potential enemies. The document was also cleansed of references to “domestic threats.” Experts say the MGSB overhaul indicates that the Justice and Development Party (AK Party), which has been in power since 2002, has finally managed to revise the main foreign and security principles in line with its priorities.
Gül said the new MGSB does not contain any reference to any segments of the society as a security threat, explaining that the concept of security used throughout the document was interpreted on a broad basis to include economic and energy-related aspects of security. On plans to build a NATO-wide missile defense system, Gül dismissed claims that the planned shield is designed to protect Israel from a possible Iranian missile attack. Gül said instead that the planned shield is designed to protect all NATO allies from a possible ballistic missile threat.
Cyprus is just an excuse for those who cannot stomach the accession of a Muslim country
Jack Straw
Photo: NATO
The most important strategic decision facing the EU is its future relationship with Turkey.The UK’s position has long been clear and bipartisan — full Turkish membership of the EU as soon as possible.David Cameron told the Commons in June that “we should back \[Turkey’s membership\] wholeheartedly”. Britain’s unambiguous support for Turkey will be underscored by the visit of Abdullah Gül, its President, this week, with the award to him tomorrow by the Queen of the Chatham House Prize.
Forty-six years after Turkey first signalled its wish to join the EU, there was some hope in 2005 that rapid progress towards this goal might be achieved. Following tortuous negotiations under the UK Presidency all 27 members of the EU agreed on 3 October 2005 actively to start accession negotiations with Turkey .
But the wheels have come off, with potentially disastrous consequences. In the summer, in light of Turkey’s refusal to back tougher sanctions on Iran , Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, claimed that Turkey may have been “pushed by some in Europe” towards Iran. This “pushing away” has not followed from any conscious rethinking of the 2005 decision to embrace Turkey, but principally because Europe’s strategic future with Turkey (population 74 million) is now hostage to negotiations over Cyprus. (Greek Cypriot population 0.75 million, Turkish Cypriot 0.25 million).
Cyprus is an internationally recognised sovereign state. However, the writ of the Government of Cyprus extends only to the south of the island, ever since the Turkish Army’s occupation of the predominantly Turkish Cypriot north in 1974. A UN “Green Line” runs through the middle of the capital, Nicosia, with the government of the not-so-far recognised “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” (TRNC) in control in the north, with thousands of Turkish troops garrisoned there too.
There are two stories: one of the “unjustifiable” Turkish invasion; the other of such “violent oppression” by the Greek majority of the minority that Turkish protection was (and is) vital. Both sets of stories have truths, but because Greek Cyprus was admitted to the EU before any settlement of the island’s future it is their truths which dominate EU decisions on Turkey .
Of the 35 chapters of the draft accession treaty with Turkey, 18 (the key ones) are blocked or frozen — eight by a formal EU decision, four by France, and six by Cyprus. Although there is opposition in France to Turkish membership, the naked vulgarity of those whose real objections are that Turkey is 98 per cent Muslim would be far easier to counter without the convenient excuse that Cyprus provides.
Each of the blocks on Turkey’s accession can be plausibly explained by reference to some failure by Turkey , or the TRNC, to meet formal undertakings in full. But there is a larger reality here, that failures by the EU or Cyprus are brushed aside. In 2004 the President of Cyprus, Tassos Papadopoulos, signed a UN accord for a referendum on a new power-sharing constitution. He then campaigned duplicitously for a “no” vote. He was rewarded with EU membership, while solemn EU commitments to the Turkish Cypriots who kept to their side of the bargain and voted “yes” have never properly been delivered.
Despite Turkey’s longstanding acknowledgement that because of its size, and differential wage costs, there would have to be decades-long transitional restrictions, especially on free movement of labour, it has been more toughly treated by the EU than any other applicant state.
Take Bulgaria and Romania . They were admitted to the EU in 2007 after waiting only ten years. Their GDP per head is similar to Turkey’s. There are serious concerns, still, about corruption and inadequate judicial systems in these two countries. Yet the EU chose (and I was party to this) to apply a Nelson’s eye to some of those shortcomings in pursuit of a wider strategic goal. In other words the EU showed some practical vision now so lamentably lacking for Turkey.
Under a succession of able Special Representatives the UN has made heroic efforts over the years to find a one-state solution for Cyprus, in accordance with the UN mandate for a “bi-zonal bi-communal federation, with political equality”. This task now falls to Alexander Downer, the former Australian Foreign Minister. He’s talented and experienced, and might pull off success.
Next week, the Greek Cypriot President Demetris Christofias, and the TRNC President Dervis Eroglu have critical talks with the UN Secretary-General. We should pray for success. But the chances of a settlement would be greatly enhanced if the international community broke a taboo, and started publicly to recognise that if “political equality” cannot be achieved within one state, then it could with two states — north and south.
It is time for the UK Government to consider formally the partition of Cyprus if the talks fail. This will be very controversial in the UN as well as the EU. Russia will be vehement in its opposition — as it was with Kosovo. But those who respond by inviting me to wash my mouth out with carbolic might like to say how much longer the EU and the UN can tolerate the current approach, whose only consequence so far has been to paralyse the development of relations with Turkey.
Good reasons led me to believe that having (Greek Cypriot) Cyprus within the EU would assist the peace process. This judgment has not been borne out by events. When in 2004 Cypriot behaviour did lead us to have second thoughts, we should have faced down the explicit threat from Greece to veto all other accessions (of states such as Poland and Hungary ) unless Cyprus came in at the same time.
We cannot turn the clock back. But we can change the terms of trade. The EU needs Turkey rather more than Turkey needs the EU.
New site will contain authoritative record of engagements, videos, photographs and the Court Circular
Queen Elizabeth II and the rest of the royal family now have their own page on Facebook. Photograph: Geoff Pugh/PA
Already on Twitter, YouTube and Flickr, Britain’s royal family now has a presence on Facebook. Launching this morning, Facebook.com/TheBritishMonarchy has videos, photos and the Court Circular, the 200-year-old authoritative record of engagements also on Buckingham Palace’s website. The royal Facebook does not have a personal profile, so users cannot ask the royals to be their Facebook “friend”; instead they can click to “like” the page. Several unofficial pages already exist on Facebook; one, the professional-looking The-British-Monarchy page, is “liked” by more than 20,000 people.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/nov/07/the-queen-joins-facebook, 7 November 2010
Have you “liked” Turkish Forum’s facebook page yet?
BBC admits it was wrong to have given ‘impression’ that money from charity song ended up being spent on weapons
Not many people come away from a clash with Bob Geldof unscathed. And for the BBC it has proved no different. Today, across BBC1, Radio 4 and the World Service, it will broadcast an apology to the singer-philanthropist and the Band Aid Trust he founded.
Accused by Geldof of causing “appalling damage” to the famine relief charity he founded in 1985, the BBC will admit that it was wrong, in a story broadcast in March this year, to have given the “impression” that money raised from the Band Aid single Do They Know It’s Christmas ended up being spent on weapons rather than charity. It is a climbdown that Geldof said would “begin to repair some of the appalling damage done” to the reputation of Band Aid, and he welcomed it “on behalf of all those members of the public who have so magnificently donated to Band Aid and Live Aid over the last 26 years”.
Once, the BBC’s relationship with Geldof was very different. It was dispatches by BBC reporter Michael Buerk from famine-hit Ethiopia that prompted Geldof to record the song in the first place, and it was the corporation that broadcast the Live Aid concert in 1985.
But goodwill evaporated this year when the World Service’s Africa editor, Martin Plaut, broadcast a story featuring a former Ethiopian rebel commander who claimed that in 1985 only 5% of the $100m destined for famine relief in the northern province of Tigray reached the starving.
The BBC now admits that Assignment programme failed to clearly distinguish that in fact no Band Aid cash was diverted for arms sales – an embarrassing admission that Geldof said was a “lapse in standards” by the corporation.
An inquiry by the BBC’s editorial complaints unit stressed that Assignment “did not make the allegation that relief aid provided by Band Aid was diverted” but conceded that “this impression could have been taken from the programme” because viewers would have assumed that claims made by the former rebel applied to the money he helped raise.
The programme also carried an allegation from another former rebel that the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front had tricked aid workers into giving them money meant to buy food for the starving. The story was picked up by BBC news bulletins, including the Six O’Clock News.
The BBC said it “should have been more explicit in making it clear that the [Tigrayan] allegations did not relate specifically to Band Aid. There will be on air apologies and corrections and we are looking at the lessons that can be learnt.”
Today Sir Brian Barder, the British ambassador to Ethiopia between 1982 and 1986, said: “I welcome the BBC’s far-reaching apology to the Band Aid Trust for the seriously unfair and misleading impression given by the BBC World Service Assignment programme about alleged diversion of famine relief aid in limited rebel-held areas of the Ethiopian province of Tigray in the 1980s.
“The apology makes it absolutely clear that none of these allegations applied to the Band Aid relief effort.”
The publicity will be a blow to the BBC, just a day after world affairs editor John Simpson compared last month’s hastily negotiated licence fee settlement with “waterboarding”, arguing it leaves the corporation “at the government’s mercy”. To add to the corporation’s woes it is also facing a 48-hour strike from Friday by BBC journalists over pension changes.
