15 May 2003

1. "Commission admonishes Turkey for human rights", addressing the plenary session of the European Parliament on Tuesday night, 13 May, EU enlargement Commissioner Günter Verheugen expressed concern about a police raid in the Brussels-sponsored Human Rights Association in Turkey.

2. "Verheugen says storming IHD office is unacceptable", European Parliament to vote a draft resolution on the issue today, prepared by political groups.

3. "Ocalan to refuse visits", it was announced at a press conference at the Human Rights Association in Istanbul on 2 May that KADEK President Abdullah Ocalan says that he will in future refuse all visits unless the visiting rules are better observed.

4. "Democratic windfall for Turkey?", as America establishes itself in Iraq, Turkey’s geopolitical military significance may decline. Yet the declared American aim of building a Muslim democracy in Iraq will only enhance Turkey’s symbolic importance as a role model.

5. "Turkish officials in Iraq for talks with Kurds", a team of Turkish officials has gone to Iraq to hold talks with Kurdish groups and to assess the situation in Baghdad after the US-led war, Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said Wednesday.

6. "Eurozone in Iraq", Poland is wrestling with its new colonial role. Britain should help. Poland nearly took the northern zone in Iraq, containing Kurdistan. Here they might have faced a Kurdish uprising for national independence.

1. - EUOBSERVER - "Commission admonishes Turkey for human rights":

BRUSSELS / 14 May 2003

Addressing the plenary session of the European Parliament on Tuesday night, 13 May, EU enlargement Commissioner Günter Verheugen expressed concern about a police raid in the Brussels-sponsored Human Rights Association in Turkey.

Mr Verheugen said that the police raid was highly incompatible with the EU human rights requests and he spoke about "incomprehensible harassment".

The Human Rights Association received large grants from the European Commission between 1992-1999 and it is expected to give more money to the organisation for work which goes towards fulfilling the EU's democratic criteria - known as the Copenhagen criteria.

A Commission spokesman said that there is a "yawning gap" between stated reforms and their implementation.

Turkey regrets actions

Turkish Justice Minister Cemil Cicek said he regretted the action by the authorities and recognised the importance of correct implementation of the political reforms adopted by Turkey.

He went on to add that the Turkish judiciary bodies were the ones responsible.

Still Mr Verheugen remained critical and underlined the gap between the political reforms and the attitude of the Turkish executive and judicial authorities.

He added that the actual implementation of reform will be one of the key aspects of the 2004 Commission's report on Turkey that will establish whether the country fulfils the political criteria or not - and thus is eligible for EU membership.

Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül will visit the enlargement commissioner this Thursday, 15 May. Mr Verheugen told MEPs that he would bring up the issue in the meeting.

At the plenary session this week, MEPs adopted a report stating that the conditions for the opening of accession negotiations with Turkey are not yet in place.

2. - Turkish Daily News - "Verheugen says storming IHD office is unacceptable":

European Parliament to vote a draft resolution on the issue today, prepared by political groups

BRUSSELS / 15 May 2003

EU Commissioner responsible for enlargement Guenther Verheugen criticized the Turkish police and State Security Court (DGM) prosecutor who stormed the Human Rights Association (IHD) center of Turkey and Ankara branch's buildings last Wednesday, and said that it is unacceptable and a violation of human rights.

On Tuesday, speaking at a European Parliament session, Verheugen said the EU is expecting the continuity of the democratic and human rights reforms in Turkey. Verheugen added the statements of the Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul and Justice Minister Cemil Cicek showed that the government is not approving this treatment.

The European Parliament is planning to vote a draft resolution on the issue today, prepared by political groups.

Police searched the IHD office for three hours and confiscated documents and hard-disks. The search was related to an investigation concerning IHD and accusations of "Helping terrorist organizations".

The draft defended that the treatment against IHD does not comply with Turkey's commitments regarding the Copenhagen criteria.

The draft wanted the EU Commission and Council to closely follow the developments in Turkey in democracy and human rights areas, and urged Turkey to make a statement on the search.

IHD Ankara branch office of the association was searched by police from the anti-terror section and Guvenlik police department accompanied by the DGM's Public Prosecutor.

According to IHD, police seized documents, booklets and personal computers from the IHD office.

3. - Dicle News Agency - "Ocalan to refuse visits":

2 May 2003 / translated by KSC

It was announced at a press conference at the Human Rights Association in Istanbul on 2 May that KADEK President Abdullah Ocalan says that he will in future refuse all visits unless the visiting rules are better observed. The announcement was made by his lawyer Hatice Korkut and his brother Mehmet Ocalan. Korkut pointed out that her client has been held in solitary confinement in the most severe conditions of isolation on the prison island of Imrali since 15 February, and that the conditions in which he is held would be unlawfully worsened.

Since October 2002 Ocalan¹s lawyers and family have only been able to make five visits of one hour each to him on Imrali. Korkut continued: ³The refusal to permit visits on highly implausible grounds means that even the right to legal representation is being put beyond reach. Moreover on the last visit the length of the visit was cut even more. Previously an hour each was allowed for both defence lawyers and family, but now the time for visits has been restricted to 45 minutes for the lawyers and 15 minutes form members of the family. For the family in particular this represents a serious infringement of their rights.²

Korkut emphasised that on the last visit because of this unlawful procedure it was impossible to ascertain even sufficient information about Ocalan¹s health and living conditions. She also explained that proceedings are taking place before the European Court of Human Rights and in Greece, and that as the lawyers were unable to exchange views on these cases with their client, his right to defence is being put beyond reach. She said that both cases were at a critical point, and that as her client has no possibility of informing himself adequately over the state of the cases, the conclusion could not be avoided that deliberate obstacles were being put in his path. Press statements from high official quarters have been put out about the prison conditions on Imrali saying that ³We have abolished the death penalty, but the judgement is being carried out slowly, day by day.² Such a statement offends against the principles of a state that is under the rule of law, as well as against personal rights.

Ocalan himself classified this action as a provocation against the efforts being made for towards peace and unity according to Korkut, who said: ³We can see that this is a political decision about a legal matter. Positive discussions have taken place recently about a democratic solution to the Kurdish question. The unlawful procedures that have been taken against my client are likely to destroy this developing positive atmosphere. My client has stated that this action, together with the developments in Iraq, constitutes a game which is being played against Turkey. The people¹s freedom is involved, and the problems must be solved by democratically. My client emphasises that Turkish and Kurdish nationalism is being stoked up in order to provoke the onset of a prolonged period of violence. The problems that face us cannot be solved by denial and annihilation. He has further stated that he will refuse visits from his defence lawyers and his family if there is no improvement in the application of the rules, as under the present circumstances they have lost their function. We would like to point out emphatically that everyone who is interested in his case will feel alarmed by this situation and should make every effort to prevent the very serious political and social consequences that could arise from the special treatment being meted out to him.²

Two Day Journey for 15 Minute Visit

Mehmet Ocalan explained at the press conference that he and his sisters have to travel every week from Urfa to visit their brother, and wished to protest against the special rule under which the visiting time has been reduced to 15 minutes. (Ö.)

Kiraz Bicici, President of the Istanbul branch of the Human Rights Association added that Ocalan¹s isolation was no longer a technical event, and cited the statements of the General Staff.

Kiraz Bicici, President of the Istanbul branch of the Human Rights Association, additionally stated the question of Ocalan¹s isolation was no longer a merely technical matter, and drew attention to the statements of the General Staff on the subject. ³We are talking here about serious rights violations. As for the person in question, there can be no special rules devised for particular individuals. The isolation policy must be ended immediately.²

A journalist put the following question to lawyer Hatice Korkut at the press conference: ³A DEHAP member has been arrested for using the expression ³Sayin Ocalan². You use this expression as well. What do you make of this situation?² Korkut replied: ³I use the word ³Mr² as I am referring to my client. But I would still use it even if he were not my client. Only I can decide whom I respect and therefore address as ³Mr². And I shall continue to use this expression in the future.² Kiraz Bicici added: ³I too shall be using this formula when speaking of Ocalan. Who uses ³Mr² and of whom they use it depends on a person¹s own decision, not on the will of the state. If we are talking about a crime here, we shall all have to commit this crime together and suffer the penalty that accompanies it.²

4. - The Daily Times(Pakistan) - "Democratic windfall for Turkey?":

15 May 2003 / by Haldun Gulalp*

As America establishes itself in Iraq, Turkey’s geopolitical military significance may decline. Yet the declared American aim of building a Muslim democracy in Iraq will only enhance Turkey’s symbolic importance as a role model

Turkey’s seeming fall from grace with the US may turn out to be a blessing in disguise. The Iraq war and the tortured diplomacy that led up to it may help resolve Turkey’s conflict between its “strategic alliance” with America and its drive to join the EU.

The elections last November that brought the Justice and Development Party (AKP) to power were preceded by a dispute between the members of the then-ruling coalition over enacting the reforms demanded by the EU. Some liberal elements of that “secular” coalition resigned from the government and joined with the Islamists to push the reforms through parliament.

After coming to power, the AKP’s leaders, former Islamists who had reinvented themselves as “conservative democrats,” energetically engaged with the US, the EU, and the UN on issues ranging from Cyprus to Iraq, from Kurdish language rights to other human rights issues within Turkey. Having suffered the oppressive practices of Turkey’s “secular” state and recognising that human rights must be protected across-the-board, the AKP emerged as a credible interlocutor with the West. The US, preoccupied with the supposed spectre of a “clash of civilisations” between Islam and the West, saw the AKP’s modern, westernised face as an opportunity and urged the EU to admit Turkey.

Today, both “conservative democrats” and liberals advocate passing all the reforms needed to gain accession to the EU, while opponents include extreme nationalists, of both left and right, as well as some elements of the “secular” establishment. The Europeans could have tipped the balance decisively in favour of the reformers by finally rewarding the efforts of the pro-EU Turks at last December’s summit of EU leaders. Instead, the EU kept Turkey waiting yet again, putting off formal negotiations that, in any case, may take years to complete.

Europe’s persistent reluctance puts the Turks in a quandary. The Americans want full EU membership for Turkey — a longstanding NATO member and close American ally — while Europeans complain about the Turkish military’s domestic political role. The paradox is that, by maintaining a political distance and thus limiting Turkey’s options, Europe may end up reinforcing Turkey’s status as a military outpost of the US.

At least, that was how things were shaping up prior to the war in Iraq. Then, despite massive US pressure, Turkey’s parliament unexpectedly rejected the government’s proposal to allow US troops in Turkey to launch an invasion from Turkish territory. Turkey’s refusal to grant the Americans access to military bases on its territory effectively ruled out a northern front in the war. The Turkish government even attempted a regional initiative for a peaceful solution to the crisis, an effort no current EU member could have contemplated.

Parliament’s rejection of US troops powerfully refutes suggestions that Turkey was primarily concerned about the size of the American aid package on offer as an inducement to cooperate. Suggestions that characterised the vote as revealing the government’s true “Islamic” character ignore the fact that the only opposition party in parliament, the Republican People’s Party — founded by Atatürk and still fully “secularist” — voted against the plan. Likewise, other elements of Turkey’s secular establishment, including the president and the military leadership, either opposed or were lukewarm, at best, to the idea of war in Iraq.

Turkey’s military initially remained silent on the issue, uncharacteristically watching the civilian political process unfold. By contrast, the military had earlier publicly criticised AKP initiatives on Cyprus. Their silence on Iraq reflected their apprehension about unwanted alternatives: either support the US plan and risk encouraging Kurdish moves toward an independent state, or oppose the Americans and jeopardise a critical strategic relationship. They chose to defer to the civilian leadership and to parliament, which, in voting down the US plan, reflected overwhelming public sentiment against the war. Only after the vote did the Chief of Staff publicly endorse the original proposal to bring in American troops.

In fact, the allegedly Islamic party had skilfully managed to negotiate with an unrelenting US, consult with the Turkish military and President, and share all information with the public and parliament. Walking a fine line in what was essentially a lose-lose situation, the party leadership laid out the stakes clearly and judiciously left the final decision to parliament. The outcome was a victory for Turkish democracy and recognised as such internationally.

After the US military action in Iraq, the tables may be turning in surprising ways. As America establishes itself in Iraq, Turkey’s geopolitical military significance may decline. Yet the declared American aim of building a Muslim democracy in Iraq will only enhance Turkey’s symbolic importance as a role model. This shift in Turkey’s strategic role may also be reflected in a new domestic balance between the military and the forces pushing for reform. With careful management, Turkey may find itself drawing closer to Europe, while rebuilding its relationship with America.

*Haldun Gülalp is Professor of Sociology at Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey and is currently a Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC

5. - AFP - "Turkish officials in Iraq for talks with Kurds":

ISTANBUL / 14 May 2003

A team of Turkish officials has gone to Iraq to hold talks with Kurdish groups and to assess the situation in Baghdad after the US-led war, Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said Wednesday.

"A delegation from the foreign ministry went to northern Iraq yesterday where they will meet the leaders of the two main Kurdish groups controlling the region," Gul told reporters here. The delegation would also meet representatives of the Turkmens, a local community of Turkish origin, before travelling onto Baghdad, the minister said.

"They will make observations on the situation in Baghdad," Gul said. The NTV news channel reported that the delegation would hold talks with US military and civilian officials in the Iraqi capital. The war in Iraq has dented Ankara's ties both with Washington and the Iraqi Kurds, though all parties have pledged to work to repair the damage.

Turkey, a key Muslim ally of the United States, dealt a major blow to US war plans when its parliament refused to allow US troops to deploy in the country to invade neighbouring Iraq from the north. Turkey's plans to send troops to Kurdish-held northern Iraq during the war also strained bilateral ties and drew the ire of the Iraqi Kurds. Ankara refrained from intervening only after strong pressure from Washington.

Ankara fears that the Iraqi Kurds may seek an independent state, which could rekindle similar hopes among Kurds in southeastern Turkey, where Ankara has put down Kurdish separatists. Another concern for Ankara is the presence of Turkish Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq.

Turkey says some 5,000 armed militants from the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) have found refuge in the area. The country has maintained a number of troops there since 1997 to hunt down the rebels.

The PKK threatened at the weekend to respond with force if either Turkey or the United States moved to purge northern Iraq of its militants following a warning by Washington that it will not tolerate the group, which is on the US list of terrorist organizations, in the region in post-war Iraq.

6. - The Guardian - "Eurozone in Iraq":

Poland is wrestling with its new colonial role. Britain should help. Poland nearly took the northern zone in Iraq, containing Kurdistan. Here they might have faced a Kurdish uprising for national independence.

WARSAW / 15 May 2003 / by Timothy Garton Ash

After the Riyadh bombings, who will be the next western victims of Islamist terror? It could be Poles running the Polish occupation zone in Iraq.

I've spent a week in Poland and everyone I have spoken to here, from a peasant farmer sitting on a battered old chair among his apple trees to the prime minister in his imposing office, smiled the same mildly incredulous smile at this staggering metamorphosis of their country's position in the world. For two centuries, Poland's fate was to be occupied and partitioned by imperial powers; suddenly it is itself to be an occupying, colonial power. For 40 years, under communism, my Polish friends spoke longingly of "the west"; now they could be suicide bombed because they're part of it. The Poles, led by a post-communist president and government, are following Rudyard Kipling's imperial admonition to "take up the white man's burden" with deeply ironical shrugs, and trepidation, but also with determination.

Poland nearly took the northern zone in Iraq, containing Kurdistan. Here they might have faced a Kurdish uprising for national independence. Since the Poles themselves spent much of the last two centuries fighting for national independence against occupying powers, that would have faced them with a certain moral dilemma. Instead they've got the zone the Americans have tagged "upper south", which contains some of the heartlands of Shia Islam. Shia Islamist extremists, working with armed infiltrators from Iran, pose the most acute security threat.

Both the prime minister and the foreign minister explained to me that post-communist Poland has much to offer post-Ba'athist Iraq. After all, no one knows better what it takes to transform a dictatorially run state and economy into a free, democratic one. But the first challenge is security. They've been told they need about 9,000 soldiers to run their zone. The Poles have so far committed only 1,500, and Polish soldiers have zilch experience in this kind of thing. Their immediate problem is that no one else very much wants to serve under them, apart from a miscellaneous group of other central and east Europeans.

Last week, they somewhat naively suggested to Germany that it might like to help out, since, after all, there is already a Polish-German-Danish corps working within the framework of Nato. The Germans said a sharp, angry: "Nein!" Polish diplomats should have realised that the Schröder government would never come in without a clear, prior UN mandate for the occupation. Yet one also feels that the very idea of Germans serving under Poles at the behest of the Americans was just too much for most Germans to take. Reaching out a generous, pronate German hand of "reconciliation" to the Poles is one thing; having enough genuine respect for them to agree to serve under Polish command is quite another. Now the Polish government is trying to persuade the Spaniards to join them, but a combination of Spanish national pride and the unpopularity in Spain of the American war on Iraq, at a time when Jose Maria Aznar faces local and regional elections, makes that difficult too.

Here's where Britain comes in. Tony Blair will travel to Warsaw to give a big speech at the end of May. His main purpose will be to show British interest in the country and support for the "yes" campaign in Poland's referendum campaign on EU membership. (Other people's euro-referendum challenges are somewhat easier to tackle than one's own.) But he should also announce on this occasion that Britain will send British troops to serve under Polish command in the "upper south" occupation zone. Logistically this would be easy enough, since the British troops are already in Iraq. Militarily, it makes good sense, since British troops are infinitely more experienced than the Poles in this kind of operation, and chaos in the Polish zone would adversely affect the adjacent British one.

Above all, though, it would be a great political gesture. Polish air force pilots once gave their lives for the defence of this country, in the Battle of Britain. They did so under British command. How fitting it would be if Britain were now the first major European power to offer its troops for service in another country under Polish command. Whatever you think of the rights or wrongs of the current Anglo-American occupation of Iraq, I hope you can see the poetic justice in that.

Yet there's also a nasty political trap here. For the Bush administration did not assign an occupation zone to Poland out of philanthropic Polonophilia, or just with an eye to Polish-American votes. It was also part of an unpleasant American strategy of "divide and rule" in Europe: a demonstrative reaching out to what Donald Rumsfeld calls "new Europe" while cold-shouldering the "old Europe" of France and Germany. The flattery is almost irresistible. What Polish heart would not be stirred by a recent headline in the Wall Street Journal Europe: "Poland rises to status of global player"? After all, even British prime ministers are liable to have their heads turned by standing ovations in Washington.

I have been impressed in Warsaw by the rather level-headed way in which Polish leaders see this temptation. Incensed though they are at French and German attitudes, they seem determined not to become a pawn - or even a knight - in Washington's European chess game. Great attention was paid to a recent summit of the so-called "Weimar Triangle" of Poland, France and Germany, in which President Aleksander Kwasniewski met President Jacques Chirac and Chancellor Gerhard Schröder in the city of Wroclaw. But Poland can be much helped in this balancing act between Europe and America by a country which is, in fact, performing exactly the same act: Britain.

So Blair should not make this offer in terms of Poland joining an Anglo- American alliance. Instead, he should do it in a European context. He could put in a private word with his friend Jose Maria Aznar, perhaps to get some Spanish troops transferred from the British to the Polish zone after the Spanish elections on May 25. He might talk to his friend Gerhard Schröder about the Germans coming in after all, when and if there's a UN mandate acceptable to them. He could have a word with the Danes, who've worked closely with the Poles in that German-Polish-Danish corps. In time, both the British and the Polish zones should become eurozones of Nato peacekeepers, under the kind of international, legal, multilateral authority that Euro peans like to see in the world. And of course we must make it quite clear that this hard core of European security cooperation in the Middle East will be entirely open to the French, whenever they wish to join - as we heartily hope they will.

Oh yes, and one other thing: Tony Blair could also put in a quick call to his friend George Bush, to ensure that when the American president speaks in Krakow, a day after the British prime minister speaks in Warsaw, he will say that the United States fully supports Polish membership in a strong European Union. That double whammy, with a bit of spiritual follow-up from the Pope, should enable the Polish government to win its euro-referendum. Indirectly, it might even help Blair to win his own.