Category: Europe

  • Turkey and Armenia Friends and neighbours

    Turkey and Armenia Friends and neighbours

     

    Sep 25th 2008 | ANKARA AND YEREVAN
    From The Economist print edition
    Rising hopes of better relations between two historic enemies

     
    KEMAL ATATURK , father of modern Turkey, rescued hundreds of Armenian women and children from mass slaughter by Ottoman forces during and after the first world war. This untold story, which is sure to surprise many of today’s Turks, is one of many collected by the Armenian genocide museum in Yerevan that “will soon be brought to light on our website,” promises Hayk Demoyan, its director.
    His project is one more example of shifting relations between Turkey and Armenia. On September 6th President Abdullah Gul became the first Turkish leader to visit Armenia when he attended a football match. Mr Gul’s decision to accept an invitation from Armenia’s president, Serzh Sarkisian, has raised expectations that Turkey may establish diplomatic ties and open the border it closed during the 1990s fighting between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh. The two foreign ministers were planning to meet in New York this week. Armenia promises to recognise Turkey’s borders and to allow a commission of historians to investigate the fate of the Ottoman Armenians.
    Reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia could tilt the balance of power in the Caucasus. Russia is Armenia’s closest regional ally. It has two bases and around 2,000 troops there. The war in Georgia has forced Armenia to rethink its position. Some 70% of its supplies flow through Georgia, and these were disrupted by Russian bombing. Peace with Turkey would give Armenia a new outside link. Some think Russia would be happy too. “It would allow Russia to marginalise and lean harder on Georgia,” argues Alexander Iskandaryan, director of the Caucasus Media Institute.
    Mending fences with Armenia would bolster Turkey’s regional clout. And it might also help to kill a resolution proposed by the American Congress to call the slaughter of the Armenians in 1915 genocide. That makes the Armenian diaspora, which is campaigning for genocide recognition, unhappy. Some speak of a “Turkish trap” aimed at rewriting history to absolve Turkey of wrongdoing. Indeed, hawks in Turkey are pressing Armenia to drop all talk of genocide.
    Even more ambitiously, the hawks want better ties with Armenia to be tied anew to progress over Nagorno-Karabakh. But at least Mr Gul seems determined to press ahead. “If we allow the dynamics that were set in motion by the Yerevan match to slip away, we may have to wait another 15-20 years for a similar chance to arise,” he has said.

  • Turkey facing difficult choice on nuclear energy

    Turkey facing difficult choice on nuclear energy

    By Thomas Grove and Orhan Coskun

    ISTANBUL/ANKARA, Sept 26 (Reuters) – Turkey has a difficult decision ahead as it ponders if it can afford to reject the single bid it received in a long-delayed $7.5 billion nuclear tender at a time when global liquidity is drying up.

    A consortium led by Russian-based Atomstroyexport was the single bidder on Wednesday in the tender to construct and operate the first of three planned nuclear power plants.

    The plants are a cornerstone of the Turkish government’s policy to cut dependence on imports and address power consumption demand, seen rising at eight percent a year.

    But doubts the tender will go ahead have mounted as analysts say the government will want a broader range of options beyond a single offer, and Atomstroyexport’s plan is considered expensive for the technology on offer.

    Analysts also have pointed out that the Russian-based company’s construction of the plant undermines Ankara’s energy policy of limiting its dependence on Russia, which already provides more than 60 percent of Turkey’s gas imports.

    “The fact the tender came at the moment of the latest global financial crisis really weighed on the process. If a competitive second bid had come in it would have been much better,” said a senior Turkish Energy Ministry source, who declined to be named.

    Business Feed Article | Business | guardian.co.uk.

  • Are Russia and Turkey Trying to Alter the Nagorno-Karabakh Peace Process Format?

    Are Russia and Turkey Trying to Alter the Nagorno-Karabakh Peace Process Format?

    Confronted with widespread international criticism over its actions in Georgia, Russia is eager to show that it can still serve as a peace broker the post-Soviet area. A primary Kremlin aim appears to be checking any further advance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

    “The South Ossetian crisis will not constitute a precedent,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told the Federation Council’s Foreign Affairs Committee on September 18. “We will continue to responsibly fulfill our mediation mission in the negotiation process and peacemaking [and] that fully applies to [the separatist conflicts of] Transdniester and Nagorno-Karabakh,” he said.

    The signal the Kremlin wants to send is that “it is not restoring its empire and that it is ready to reconcile warring parties while playing a leading role in the process,” wrote Sergei Markedonov of the Moscow-based Institute for Political and Military Analysis in the September 16 issue of Russia’s “Kommersant” daily.

    Russia has been expending a lot of energy since the August crisis to revive the Transdniester and Nagorno-Karabakh peace processes outside the framework of the existing international settlement mechanisms.

    Concerning Karabakh, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev met twice in September with his Armenian counterpart Serzh Sargsyan and once with

    EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight – Are Russia and Turkey Trying to Alter the Nagorno-Karabakh Peace Process Format?.

  • PM urges financial responsibility

    PM urges financial responsibility

    Gordon Brown has called for an end to the “age of irresponsibility”, ahead of White House talks with President Bush on the global financial crisis.

    The prime minister told the UN General Assembly that “co-ordinated” solutions to the economic downturn were needed.

    Mr Brown advocated a “new global order, founded on transparency, not opacity”.

    US talks on a $700bn (£380bn) bail-out plan to revive the finance sector have ended in stalemate. Mr Brown is due to meet President Bush at 2120 BST.

    ‘Not just national’

    The prime minister has voiced his support for the proposals put forward by the US government.

    He told the UN: “This cannot just be national anymore. We must have global supervision…

    “The age of irresponsibility must be ended. We must now become that new global order founded on transparency, not opacity.”

    On Thursday, the prime minister urged world leaders not to use the financial crisis as an excuse to abandon efforts against global poverty.

    Desire for stability

    Mr Bush has proposed the US government take on the debts of struggling financial firms in an attempt to keep them afloat and also prevent a recession.

    The prime minister said quick action was needed to stabilise the economic situation and that longer-term reforms to the world’s financial system were also needed.

    “While the problem comes out of America, it has consequences for all of us and every family will want to know that we are doing everything in our power to ensure that there is stability,” he said.

    Other issues on the agenda for the White House meeting are thought to include Iraq, Afghanistan and the situation in Georgia.

    Meanwhile, a survey of 1,012 people for BBC Two’s Daily Politics show suggests 36% trust Mr Brown and Chancellor Alistair Darling most to steer the UK’s economy through the downturn.

    Some 30% opted for Conservative leader David Cameron and shadow chancellor George Osborne, while 5% chose Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg and Treasury spokesman Vince Cable.

    The poll, conducted ComRes on 24th and 25 September, suggests that 24% of people do not know which party offers the best option on the economy. 

    To watch Video: 7636165.stm

     

    BBC 26 September 2008

  • MORE SPEED, LESS HASTE RESULTS IN TURKISH NUCLEAR TENDER FIASCO

    MORE SPEED, LESS HASTE RESULTS IN TURKISH NUCLEAR TENDER FIASCO

    By Gareth Jenkins

    Thursday, September 25, 2008

     

    Turkey’s latest attempt to acquire nuclear power resulted in humiliating failure on September 24, when only one consortium submitted a bid to build the country’s first nuclear power plant at Akkuyu, near the eastern Mediterranean port of Mersin.

    In the six months following the announcement of the contract in March, 13 consortia bought tender documents. However, almost all had subsequently expressed reservations about the project; not least about the terms of the state guarantee to buy electricity for the first 15 years of the proposed plant’s operating life. Their concerns were exacerbated by the recent turbulence on the international markets and increased uncertainty about the prospect of securing financing for the project. In the run-up to the September 24 deadline for bids, there were repeated calls for an extension of the deadline pending a resolution of ambiguities in the tender terms and a decline in the turbulence on international financial markets (see EDM, September 23). The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), however, remained adamant that the process would continue as scheduled.

    “Turkey has already waited until very late for nuclear energy. It doesn’t have the luxury of being able to afford a postponement,” Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared on September 22 (Anadolu Ajansi, September 22).

    As a result of the AKP’s intransigence, all but one of the potential bidders declined to make an offer. Humiliatingly for the government, the opening of the bids at 14.30 on September 24 was carried live on national television. Although officials from the tender commission reported that they had received six responses, it soon became clear from the five slim envelopes and single large parcel sitting on the desk in front of them that they had received only one bid. The five slim envelopes contained letters thanking the commission for its time and politely declining to submit an offer. The sole bidder was a joint venture between the state-owned Atomstroyexport of Russia and the Turkish Ciner Group (NTV, CNNTurk, CNBC, September 24).

    What happens now remains unclear. In theory, the tender process consists of three stages. In the first, the consortium presents the commission with a sealed envelope indicating an intention to bid. In the second stage, the technical details of the bid are forwarded in a sealed envelope to the Turkish Atomic Energy Authority (TAEK) to be examined for compliance with the project’s safety standards. If TAEK approves the project, a sealed envelope containing the proposed price of the electricity is opened (Referans, Dunya, Anadolu Ajansi, September 25).

    The AKP appears to have assumed that despite all the expressions of concern, several consortia would present bids and the government would be able to choose the cheapest. When asked by a Turkish journalist whether the single bid meant that the tender would now be cancelled, Haci Duran Gokkaya, the general manager of the state-owned Turkish Electricity Trading and Contracting Inc. (TETAS), huffily replied: “The fact that there was a bid means that the competition process is continuing” (NTV, Anadolu Ajansi, September 24). Gokkaya did not specify the identity of the rival with whom the Atomstroyexport-led consortium is now competing.

    The Turkish media is in doubt about why, alone of all the consortia that bought tender documents, it was the one led by a Russian state-owned monopoly that submitted a bid. Turkey currently obtains almost two thirds of its natural gas and approximately one third of its oil from Russia (see EDM, September 9).

    “The reason Russia was interested in the project was because it is the largest supplier of natural gas to Turkey, which gives it extraordinary bargaining power,” noted columnist Metin Munir in the daily Milliyet. “One of the main reasons the other companies kept their distance was concern about payment for the electricity that they would produce. Russia has no such worries. It is confident that all it would have to do would be to give the government a kick in the backside by cutting off the gas for a couple of days in the middle of winter” (Milliyet, September 25).

    Although it has received less coverage in the Turkish media, a decision by the AKP to award the contract to Atomstroyexport would undoubtedly also have political repercussions. Even before the tension sparked by the war between Russia and Georgia in August, the United States would have been unlikely to welcome Turkey’s choosing the same company that has been so heavily involved in Iran’s nuclear program. In the current political climate, awarding the contract to build Turkey’s first nuclear power plant to a Russian company would doubtless be regarded in Washington as not just an economic but also a strategic decision.

    Despite Gokkaya’s comments, the general consensus in Turkey is that the AKP will eventually have to cancel the nuclear power tender. It is currently unclear whether it would simply invite private companies to submit bids in a new tender or whether it would look for some kind of public-private partnership. Although the Nuclear Power Plant Law, which was promulgated in November 2007 (Law No. 5710, published in the Official Gazette, November 21, 2007), provides for the state to build the plant on its own if necessary, the Turkish public sector lacks the expertise to do so.

    Whichever option the AKP decides to take, the result is likely to be a further loss of time and credibility, both of which are already in increasingly short supply. Turkey currently has a total installed electricity production capacity of 40,834 megawatts (MW) (www.tetas.gov.tr); but 13,393 MW is from hydroelectric plants, which can operate only at a limited capacity as the result of declining rainfall. A recent study by the state-owned Turkish Electricity Transmission Company (TEIAS) forecast that, even if the nuclear plant at Akkuyu is completed, Turkey will still face severe electricity shortages over the next decade. The TEIAS study was based on worst case and best case scenarios, taking into account the expected growth in electricity demand over the period from 2008 to 2017. According to the best case scenario, Turkey will add 12,917 MW in installed capacity by 2017. Under the worst case scenario, just 8,599 MW will be added; but the study also found that in order to keep pace with expected demand, the country will need a minimum of 22,000 MW in extra capacity by 2017; and if the economy continues to grow at a reasonable rate, it is more likely to need an additional 34,155 MW.

    “Whatever we do, we face a crisis,” noted Songul Selvi in a commentary on the report in the daily Dunya. “The only question is how bad.” (Dunya, September 25).

  • book in german on turkish-european jews and the holocaust

    book in german on turkish-european jews and the holocaust

    From: erdalkaynar@gmx.net
    List Editor: Mark Stein <stein@MUHLENBERG.EDU>
    Editor’s Subject: H-TURK: book in german on turkish-european jews and the holocaust [E Kaynar]
    Author’s Subject: H-TURK: book in german on turkish-european jews and the holocaust [E Kaynar]
    Date Written: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 10:47:01 -0400
    Date Posted: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 10:47:01 -0400

     

    Guttstadt, Corry Cover: Die Türkei, die Juden und der Holocaust
    
    ISBN 978-3-935936-49-1 | 520 Seiten | erschienen September 2008 | 26.00
    € / 46.00 sF | lieferbar
    
    Zum Buch:
    Ab 27. September 2008 im Buchhandel - Vorbestellungen sind möglich.
    
    Die erste Generation türkischer Migranten in Westeuropa war
    mehrheitlich jüdisch. 20 bis 30.000 Juden türkischer Herkunft lebten
    während der Zwischenkriegszeit in verschiedenen europäischen Ländern,
    wo sie eigene sephardische Gemeinden gründeten. Obwohl viele von ihnen
    Opfer der Schoah wurden, wurden sie in der internationalen
    Holocaustforschung bislang kaum berücksichtigt.
    
    Die Autorin untersucht die wechselvolle Geschichte der Juden der
    Türkei. Noch gegen Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts hatten die etwa 400.000
    Juden des Osmanischen Reiches weltweit eine der größten und blühendsten
    Gemeinden gestellt. Die Kriege zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts sowie der
    forcierte Nationalismus der neu entstehenden Nationalstaaten trieb viele
    von ihnen in die Emigration. In zahlreichen europäischen Metropolen
    entstanden türkisch-jüdische Gemeinden, die ihre eigenen kulturellen und
    sozialen Strukturen hervorbrachten. Während des Nationalsozialismus
    wurden viele ihrer Mitglieder Opfer der Judenverfolgung, obwohl sie als
    Angehörige eines neutralen Staates speziellen Bedingungen unterlagen.
    
    Das Buch geht dem Schicksal türkischer Juden in verschiedenen
    europäischen Staaten unter der NS-Herrschaft nach. Besonderes
    Augenmerk liegt dabei auf der widersprüchlichen Politik der Türkei, die
    zwar einerseits verfolgten deutsch-jüdischen Wissenschaftlern und
    Künstlern Exil gewährte, andererseits jedoch wenig unternahm, um ihre
    im NS-Machtbereich befindlichen jüdischen Staatsbürger zu retten. Auch
    innerhalb der Türkei wurden Juden durch eine Sondersteuer faktisch ihres
    Besitzes beraubt, sodass die Mehrheit der verbliebenen Juden der Türkei
    nach Gründung des Staates Israel dorthin emigrierte.
    
    Das Buch schließt nicht nur eine wichtige Forschungslücke, sondern
    erhält vor dem Hintergrund eines erstarkten Antisemitismus in der
    Türkei sowie der Diskussion um das Holocaustgedenken in der
    Migrationsgesellschaft eine besondere Aktualität.
    
    „Nach unserer Kenntnis ist dies die wichtigste Arbeit über die
    sephardischen Juden türkischen Ursprungs, die Opfer des Holocaust wurden“
    (Michael Halévy).