Turkish Forum

Tag: Democracy

  • Archbishop joins criticism of BBC refusal to screen Gaza appeal

    Archbishop joins criticism of BBC refusal to screen Gaza appeal

    Corporation receives 11,000 complaints and 50 MPs plan to back motion calling on BBC to change its mind over aid film

    Protesters demonstrate outside the BBC's Broadcasting House. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

    The Archbishop of Canterbury today added to criticism of the BBC over its refusal to broadcast a charity appeal for aid to Gaza.

    He spoke as it emerged the BBC had received some 11,000 complaints and more than 50 MPs planned to back a parliamentary motion urging the corporation to reverse its decision not to broadcast tomorrow’s appeal by the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC).

     

    The early day motion to be tabled tomorrow by Labour’s Richard Burden has received the support of 51 MPs from across the Commons; ministers and some senior BBC staff have also called for the BBC to change its mind. The corporation today admitted it had received “approximately” 1,000 telephone complaints about the decision and a further 10,000 by email.

     

    Meanwhile, adding his voice to the calls for a U-turn while speaking after a church service in Cambridge, the Right Rev Rowan Williams said: “My feeling is that the BBC should broadcast an appeal.”

     

    But despite the increasing pressure, a BBC spokesman today said the situation remained unchanged.

     

    Mark Thompson, the BBC director general, has been left isolated as ITV and Channel 4 agreed to air the plea for aid.

     

    The BBC has decided that broadcasting the appeal might be seen as evidence of bias on a highly sensitive political issue.

     

    The culture secretary, Andy Burnham, said it was right that broadcasters made their own decisions, adding that the BBC faced a difficult choice because of the way it is funded.

    The communities secretary, Hazel Blears, said she hoped the BBC would “urgently review its decision”, and the Scottish first minister, Alex Salmond, said the corporation had made the “wrong decision”.

    Yesterday, the Archbishop of York, the John Sentamu, accused the broadcaster of “taking sides” and said: “This is not a row about impartiality, but rather about humanity.

     

    “This situation is akin to that of British military hospitals who treat prisoners of war as a result of their duty under the Geneva convention,” he added.

    “They do so because they identify need rather than cause. This is not an appeal by Hamas asking for arms, but by the Disasters Emergency Committee asking for relief.

    “By declining their request, the BBC has already taken sides and forsaken impartiality.”

    Thompson received backing from the BBC Trust’s chairman, Sir Michael Lyons. He said he was “concerned” about the tone of some politicians’ comments on the issue, which he said came close to “undue interference” in the BBC’s editorial independence.

    The BBC’s unrepentant stance has stirred up rebellion in the ranks of it own reporters and editors. One senior BBC news presenter told the Observer: “I’ve been talking to colleagues, and everyone here is absolutely seething about this.

    “The notion that the decision to ban the appeal will seem impartial to the public at large is quite absurd.

    “Most of us feel that the BBC’s defence of its position is pathetic, and there’s a feeling of real anger, made worse by the fact that, contractually, we are unable to speak out.”

    Jon Snow, the journalist who presents Channel 4 news, said the BBC should have been prepared to accept the judgment of the aid experts of the DEC.

    “It is a ludicrous decision,” he said. “That is what public service broadcasting is for. I think it was a decision founded on complete ignorance and I am absolutely amazed they have stuck to it.”

    Snow said he suspected a BBC bureaucrat had “panicked” and urged Thompson to put the situation right.

    Martin Bell, the former BBC foreign correspondent, said the corporation should admit it had made a mistake and claimed “a culture of timidity had crept” in.

    “I am completely appalled,” he said. “It is a grave humanitarian crisis and the people who are suffering are children. They have been caught out on this question of balance.”

    But Greg Dyke, Thompson’s predecessor as director general, said the issue had put the BBC in a “no win situation”.

    “Outside of Iraq, the single biggest issue that caused complaints was the coverage of Israel,” he added. “I can understand why the BBC has taken this decision, because on a subject as sensitive as the Middle East it is absolutely essential that the audience cannot see any evidence at all of a bias.”

    The BBC also faces demands for an explanation from within the ­Commons international development select committee.

    Andrew Mitchell, the shadow international development secretary, said: “We believe that they should allow the broadcast to proceed so that the British public, who have proved themselves so generous during recent emergencies in the Congo and Burma, can make their own judgment on the validity of the appeal.”

    The satellite broadcaster Sky said it was “considering” broadcasting the appeal.

    A BBC spokesman said: “We do accept that people are strongly guided in their view on this by the humanitarian emergency.

    “We are highlighting the situation in Gaza in every news bulletin, and that is one of the reasons the issue is so high on the agenda.”

    Guardian

  • The Turkish prime minister’s biggest asset is his opposition

    The Turkish prime minister’s biggest asset is his opposition

    Turkey’s politics

    Dec 11th 2008 | ISTANBUL
    From The Economist print edition

    FOR two decades, the leader of Turkey’s opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) has cast himself as the sole politician who can defend Ataturk’s secular republic against creeping Islam. So the sight of Deniz Baykal recruiting a woman in a full black chador at a CHP gathering and saying, “We must show respect for people’s [choice of] dress,” has rocked the country’s secular establishment. “We will never get used to this,” quavered Necla Arat, a CHP deputy.

    Mr Baykal has consistently opposed moves to let girls who wear the Islamic-style headscarf go to public universities. It was he who successfully asked the Constitutional Court to throw out a law passed by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) to relax the headscarf ban. He also said Abdullah Gul was unfit to be president because his wife covers her head, and egged on the generals when they threatened a coup to stop Mr Gul. So why the change of heart?

    Most believe that Mr Baykal’s new tolerance is linked to Turkey’s local elections next March. Since he took charge of the CHP in 1992, Mr Baykal, who is now 70, has not won a single election. His ideas are old, his officials are out of touch.

    The lack of a credible secular opposition is widely seen as the biggest failing in Turkey’s democracy. Even some generals are said to want Mr Baykal out. The maze of party rules that he has devised has made Mr Baykal almost impossible to unseat, but discontent is brewing. Kemal Kilicdaroglu, a CHP deputy who has exposed corruption inside the AKP, is a rising star. If in March the CHP fails to improve on the 21% it took in the 2007 general election (against the AKP’s 47%), Mr Baykal’s days may yet be over.

    This prospect seems to have galvanised him into embracing his pious sisters. But Mr Baykal’s last-minute manoeuvres are unlikely to sway voters. Their big worry now is not secularism but the economy. After much wobbling, the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has at last agreed to renew a standby agreement with the IMF that expired in May. The final touches will exclude the sort of pre-electoral spending spree that an increasingly truculent Mr Erdogan had hoped for. His erratic performance of recent months is beginning to take its toll. Yet so long as Mr Baykal remains his chief opponent, Mr Erdogan will have little to fear at home.

  • Democracy’s Close Call in Turkey

    Democracy’s Close Call in Turkey

    Turkey narrowly averted an incalculable disaster last week. The Constitutional Court turned back a state prosecutor’s request to dissolve the ruling Justice and Development Party and ban 71 of its leading figures from politics for five years, including Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul. The court ruling is a victory for Turkey, for democracy and for the politics of moderation in the volatile Near and Middle East. That makes it a victory for the United States as well. Had it gone the other way, Turkey’s chances of joining the European Union would have been demolished and the clearly expressed will of Turkish voters outrageously thwarted. Worst of all, an alarming message would have been sent to religious-minded voters throughout the Muslim world that scrupulous adherence to the ground rules of democratic politics was no guarantee of equal political rights and representation.

    New York Times Article

  • `Ice warrior’ poised to repel rise of Islamic rule in Turkey …. Jon Swain

    `Ice warrior’ poised to repel rise of Islamic rule in Turkey …. Jon Swain

     
    From The Sunday Times, August 3, 2008

    As a result, Turks know the commander of the armed forces has the
    fate of their nation in his hands every bit as much as any elected
    prime minister.

    So the appointment of a new chief of the general staff is always a
    closely monitored event. Seldom have Turks watched more closely than
    at this moment.

    The next chief of the armed forces is being chosen this weekend at
    the end of a tumultuous week. Two terrorist bombs exploded last
    Sunday night in Istanbul, killing 17 people, including five children
    whose bodies were riddled with shrapnel.

    Erdogan makes unity plea after bombings

    Turkey managed to step back from the brink of political chaos last
    Wednesday after the country’s highest court rejected an application
    to close the governing party on the grounds that it was seeking to
    introduce Islamic laws in violation of the secular constitution. Even
    so, a majority of the judges found the party guilty of eroding
    secularism.

    Adding to the crisis, two senior retired generals are in jail pending
    charges of involvement with a group dedicated to overthrowing the
    government.

    To choose a new armed forces supremo and make other senior military
    appointments, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister, is chairing a
    meeting of the supreme military board at army headquarters in Ankara,
    the capital.

    The meeting started on Friday and will last four days. The name of
    the general who is to be promoted to the top job will be announced
    when it ends tomorrow.

    He is widely expected to be General Ilker Basbug, commander of the
    army, who is called in military circles the “ice warrior” because he
    has a reputation for being calm and pragmatic.

    Sandhurst-trained Basbug, 65, will have the top job for the next two
    years. He is a formidable military figure and an ideological
    hardliner who will ensure that Erdogan’s government – which was
    elected last year with 47% of the vote but is mistrusted by the
    military, which sees itself as guardian of a secular society – walks
    a narrow political line.

    For these reasons Basbug is almost certainly not the general Erdogan
    would choose to promote. The outgoing chief of the general staff,
    General Mehmet Yasar Buyukanit, was also a hardliner but he was
    impulsive and could be outmanoeuvred by the prime minister.

    “Erdogan will find Basbug is a much more formidable opponent than his
    predecessor. He is a lot more subtle,” said a military source.

    The prime minister has the constitutional authority to oppose
    Basbug’s appointment – this authority has been invoked in the past
    but has almost always backfired – and Erdogan knows last week’s
    dramatic events have left him politically vulnerable.

    “Erdogan is wary of Basbug and would have preferred to have appointed
    someone else, but I’d be very surprised if he would be stupid enough
    to try to stop Basbug. This is no time to upset the armed forces’
    hierarchy,” said the military source.

    Last Wednesday Erdogan narrowly survived legal moves to ban him and
    the president Abdullah Gul from politics and to close his governing
    party on the grounds that they were steering the country towards
    Islamic rule.

    After three days of deliberations, the 11 judges of Turkey’s
    constitutional court decided against an indictment accusing the
    Justice and Development party (AKP) of pursuing an Islamic agenda and
    undermining Turkey’s secular constitution.

    The court punished Erdogan’s party for its Islamic tilt by cutting in
    half its public funding for next year, but a verdict against the AKP
    had been widely expected.

    The court had already overturned AKP efforts to lift a 1989 law that
    banned women from wearing Islamic headscarves in universities.

    Erdogan’s secularist opponents, who dominate the military and
    judiciary, claim his policies mask plans to make Turkey more like
    Iran or Saudi Arabia.

    In Turkey, the military has traditionally had multiple pressure
    points on the civilian government, through the chief of the general
    staff’s weekly meetings with the prime minister and president, and
    through the twice-monthly meetings of the national security council.

    Manipulating the civilian government, sometimes through thinly veiled
    threats    , is a subtle art that Buyukanit was not good at.

    However, Basbug is expected to be more effective in influencing
    Erdogan’s government without giving the prime minister the excuse to
    complain he has come under undemocratic pressure. Basbug is known for
    well-crafted public statements that do not alienate the government.

    The decision of the constitutional court not to ban Erdogan and his
    party clears the way for the prime minister to pursue democratic
    reforms and his goal of European Union membership. As a prerequisite
    for membership, the EU has demanded a reduction in the military’s
    influence in Turkish politics.

    Erdogan is expected to start work on a new constitution, but the
    court’s verdict has served notice that it and the military will be
    watching his party closely for any signs of Islamic activity and he
    will have to be careful how he goes about constitutional reform.

    If he tries to go too far there is no doubt, regardless of the EU’s
    disapproval, that Basbug and the military will come down hard, just
    as the armed forces have in the past.

    Turkey calls itself a democracy but the military has always hovered
    in the wings. Military coups have removed elected governments from
    power three times in the past 50 years.
  • Democracy’s Close Call in Turkey

    Democracy’s Close Call in Turkey

    Turkey narrowly averted an incalculable disaster last week. The Constitutional Court turned back a state prosecutor’s request to dissolve the ruling Justice and Development Party and ban 71 of its leading figures from politics for five years, including Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul.

    The court ruling is a victory for Turkey, for democracy and for the politics of moderation in the volatile Near and Middle East. That makes it a victory for the United States as well.

    Had it gone the other way, Turkey’s chances of joining the European Union would have been demolished and the clearly expressed will of Turkish voters outrageously thwarted. Worst of all, an alarming message would have been sent to religious-minded voters throughout the Muslim world that scrupulous adherence to the ground rules of democratic politics was no guarantee of equal political rights and representation.

    The margin by which these multiple catastrophes were averted could scarcely have been narrower. A majority of six of the 11 justices voted to ban the party. Fortunately, a super-majority of seven was required. Still, the party had half of its public financing cut for the next election and was warned to steer away from policies the court considered too Islamic, like allowing women in head scarves to attend universities.

    Those aspects of the ruling provided some consolation to Turkey’s powerful military-secular establishment. But they are hardly consistent with democracy as it is practiced in the United States and the European Union. Nonetheless, Turkey’s ruling party would be wise to move slowly and carefully in its efforts to expand the civil rights of the religiously observant, and make greater efforts to cultivate understanding and support from its wary secular opponents.

    Turkey has progressed a very long way from the not very long ago days when the secular establishment and its powerful military and judicial allies felt little inhibition about staging overt and covert coups of every variety against elected governments that did not do their political bidding. The last such event was in 1997.

    Since then, the lure of European Union membership, shifts in the Turkish electorate and the generally responsible behavior of the Justice and Development Party in power have brought a healthy change in attitudes, as seen in the votes of the five justices who blocked the ban. Continued restraint by the ruling party can help widen democracy’s still perilously thin safety margin.

  • A triumph for Turkey – and its allies

    A triumph for Turkey – and its allies

    By M K Bhadrakumar

    The Israelis are expected to know something extra about their tough neighborhood that we do not know. In all probability, the two Israeli officials – Shalom Turjeman and Yoram Turbowitz – knew when they set out for Ankara on Tuesday that Turkey’s government was far from dysfunctional or was going to be in any danger of extinction within the next 24 hours.

    The two advisors to (outgoing ) Prime Minister Ehud Olmert were on a sensitive mission to hold the fourth round of peace talks with Syria under Turkish mediation. The format of the talks is such that Turkish officials shuttle between the Israeli and Syrian diplomats, who do not come face to face. The Turks seem to have done a masterly job. On Monday, Syria’s ambassador to the United States, Imad Mustafa, speaking on a public platform in Washington, said, “We [Syria and Israel] desire to recognize each other and end the state of war.”

    “Here, then, is a grand thing on offer. Let us sit together, let us make peace, let us end once and for all the state of war,” Imad added, referring to the peace talks brokered by Turkey. Clearly, Turkey’s political stability is no longer just a national issue of 80 million Turks. It is a vital issue today for the international community. And Turkey’s role in the Israel-Syria peace talks is only the tip of the iceberg. In the highly volatile Middle East situation, Turkey also facilitated contacts between US National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki. (The two adversaries visited Ankara recently.) Furthermore, Turkey has waded into the Iraq project.

    Besides, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is poised to spread to the northern shores of the Black Sea. The new cold war has arrived in Turkey. Moscow is determined not to repeat its historic mistake of driving Turkey into the NATO camp, as it did in the 1950s.

    Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is scheduling a visit to Turkey. A Moscow analyst noted, “Atomstroyexport [Russia’s nuclear power equipment and service equipment monopoly] is ready to provide Turkey with a project for the construction of a nuclear power plant [NPP] that will be less expensive and more reliable than its American counterparts. Such NPPs will help Turkey to consolidate its position in the regional energy market, especially considering Iran’s nuclear energy problems. Moscow has long been hinting to Ankara that it is best to give priority to economic expediency, especially in the energy industry.”Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.

    (Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

    Source: Asia Times, Aug 2, 2008