8
May 2003
2. "Turkish military facing domestic and foreign challenges", Turkey’s military, which has long cast itself as the defender of the country’s secular tradition, is facing a two-front political challenge.
3. "Kirkuk Reclaimed: Kurds Take Back Their City, Culture, and Stake in the Iraqi Oil Industry", no place in Iraq has more to gain from Saddam Hussein's fall than the oil-rich Kurdish city of Kirkuk. And perhaps no place is more grateful for its liberation.
4. "Cracks in Cyprus's 'Berlin Wall'", Turkey's leader heads to the divided island this week as a conciliatory trend continues to grow.
5. "Turkey, BP Say Pipeline Project Proceeds", the government of Turkey and oil giant BP said Wednesday that construction of a $3 billion oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea to a Turkish port on the Mediterranean was on track.
6. "Relations with the U.S. in the post-war period", Turkey’s place in the US’ Pax Americana in Iraq’s postwar period and how the new policy of the Bush administration will affect Turkish-US relations from now on.
1. - The New York Times - "Turkey hits back at criticism from U.S.":
ISTANBUL / May 8, 2003
by Marc Lacey
Officials in Turkey on Wednesday rejected criticism by Paul Wolfowitz, the U.S. deputy defense secretary, who suggested that the country had made a mistake by not opening its doors to the American military during the Iraq war.
"Turkey, from the very beginning, never made any mistakes, and has taken all the necessary steps in all sincerity," Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said.
Meanwhile, Condoleezza Rice, President George W. Bush's national security adviser, accused France of trying to take NATO hostage and of threatening smaller countries that had backed the White House position on the war.
"The United States did not divide the Europeans," she said in interviews published Wednesday in the Spanish newspapers El Pais, El Mundo, ABC and La Vanguardia. "It wasn't us that threatened smaller countries with reprisals nor tried to shut up the countries of Eastern Europe."
As for attempts by France, as well as Germany, to prevent NATO from reinforcing the security of Turkey, Rice said, "Nobody should take NATO hostage."
Wolfowitz, in an interview broadcast on Tuesday on CNN-Turk, strongly criticized Turkey for not joining the Bush administration's campaign to topple Saddam Hussein. Just before the American bombing began, the Turkish Parliament rejected Pentagon requests to base troops in Turkey as part of a northern offensive on Iraq.
"Let's have a Turkey that steps up and says: 'We made a mistake. We should have known how bad things were in Iraq, but we know now. Let's figure out how we can be as helpful as possible to the Americans,'" Wolfowitz said. "I'd like to see a different sort of attitude than I have yet detected."
Wolfowitz singled out the Turkish military for criticism, saying it had lacked leadership at a critical foreign policy moment. "I think for whatever reason, they did not play the strong leadership role that we would have expected," Wolfowitz said in the interview, held Monday in Washington.
The Turkish public strongly opposed the war, fearing that the military action against a Muslim neighbor would destabilize the region.
Wolfowitz suggested that relations between the United States and Turkey would improve if officials in Ankara followed Washington's line in its relations with Iran and Syria. American officials have been concerned by recent diplomatic overtures between Turkey and its neighbors, including a trip to Syria by the Turkish foreign minister, Abdullah Gul, and a visit to Turkey by Iran's first vice president, Mohammed Reza Aref.
The Turkish justice minister, Cemil Cicek, said Wednesday that Turkey's relationship with the United States ought to be viewed over the last 50 years and not just in relation to one disagreement.
"Many Turkish citizens died due to the importance we attributed to the relations and to the friendship with the U.S.," he said, noting that 400 Turks died in the Korean War while fighting on the side of the United States.
Turkey did allow the United States to use its airspace after the
war in Iraq began but the parliamentary vote in Ankara frustrated
American officials and sent American military planners back to the
drawing board.
2. - Eurasia Insight - "Turkish military facing domestic and foreign challenges":
7 May 2003 / by Nicolas Birch
Turkey’s military, which has long cast itself as the defender of the country’s secular tradition, is facing a two-front political challenge. Turkish generals have already clashed with members of the governing Justice and Development Party over recent policy moves. At the same time, the military has come under heavy criticism from top US officials for not assuming a "strong leadership role" in Turkish regional diplomatic initiatives following the Iraq conflict.
An indicator of the challenges confronting the Turkish military was the length of the April 30 meeting of the National Security Council (MGK), which provides a monthly opportunity for Turkey’s top brass to discuss policy with civilian political leaders. That MGK session lasted seven-and-a-half hours, the longest such meeting in several years. In sharp contrast, the statement released following the meeting was startlingly brief – one sentence reaffirming that "secularism must be meticulously protected."
Well before it gained a landslide victory in last November’s parliamentary elections, the Islamic roots of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) prompted deep suspicion in military circles. And despite repeated AKP insistence that its political approach is moderate, and that it should not be compared to the Islamist government pushed out of power in February 1997, government-military tension has escalated in recent weeks.
Worried by a recent Foreign Ministry circular advising embassies to improve links with Milli Gorus, a conservative religious group with a wide following among Europe’s massive Turkish Diaspora, Turkish military leaders are increasingly concerned by government moves to replace senior bureaucrats with AKP-loyalists.
AKP-military tension burst into the open April 23, when top generals, along with President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and opposition politicians, declined to attend a reception hosted by parliamentary speaker Bulent Arinc to celebrate the anniversary of the parliament’s foundation. The cause of the boycott was an announcement that Arinc’s head-scarfed wife would attend the reception. Those staying away from the reception viewed the announcement as a political challenge to Turkish secularism. Ultimately, Arinc backed down, saying his wife would not attend.
Some political observers, including Cengiz Candar, have criticized the AKP for bowing to the military’s pressure. But other experts suggest that the AKP’s large parliamentary majority can be deceiving when it comes to gauging the party’s political influence.
"The AKP’s hold on power is less secure than crude [parliamentary] seat-counting suggests," Ankara University political scientist Dogu Ergil said. "When you take into account abstentions and the 10 percent electoral threshold required for parliamentary representation, only a quarter of Turks actually supported it."
AKP influence is further diluted by the fact that "most Turks still see the army as the only trustworthy barrier against political mismanagement," Ergil said.
Political analysts suggest the government’s electoral promise to promote reforms that bring Turkey into compliance with European Union accession criteria may increase military-civilian friction.
"Almost every one of the changes AKP will try to push through will affect the army directly or indirectly," Ergil said. He pointed to the government’s failed attempt to reform the deeply unpopular Higher Education Committee, which enables the state to impose ideologically suitable rectors on universities. The AKP dropped the initiative in the face of a storm of establishment criticism.
Since last November, the government has also stepped back from plans to introduce an appeal system to State Security Courts, retracted criticisms of the army’s right to expel soldiers suspected of religious extremism, and failed to persuade the bureaucracy of the need to grant greater cultural rights to the country’s Kurdish minority.
Far more significantly to Turkey’s EU hopes, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan back-tracked on his original insistence that Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas compromise on a UN plan to re-unify Cyprus. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The reason? The army and hard-liners in the bureaucracy feel an ongoing Turkish military presence on the island is vital to the defense of what they term "Anatolia’s soft underbelly."
"The European process would cause tensions between military and government no matter which party was in power," says Istanbul-based political scientist Soli Ozel. "The fact it’s the AKP just gives the generals a convenient stick to beat them with – a secret Islamic agenda."
In contrast to the domestic political realm, where the AKP is under pressure, it is the Turkish military that is feeling the most heat in the international arena. On May 6, US Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz lashed out at the Turkish military, appearing to tacitly hold the generals responsible for recent diplomatic moves by Ankara that have rankled Washington. "For whatever reason, they [Turkish military leaders] did not play the strong leadership role … that we would have expected," Wolfowitz said in an interview with CNN-Turk television.
US-Turkish relations have been marked by tension since early March, when the Turkish parliament rejected a US troop basing agreement shortly before the outbreak of the Iraq conflict. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].
Overall, Wolfowitz castigated Turkey for not towing Washington’s tough line on relations with Iran and Syria. He called on Turkey to admit it "made a mistake" on its stance toward the Iraq war, adding that Ankara should now "figure out how we [Turks] can be as helpful as possible to the Americans."
Some analysts predict the US criticism may weaken the Turkish military’s position in the domestic political battle. Others add that the military may be vulnerable to counter-attack over the issue of Turkey’s defense budget.
Some estimates say up to 8 percent of Turkey’s overall budget is routinely set aside for defense, in particular the maintenance of NATO’s second largest land army with nearly 700,000 troops and 4,300 tanks. Some observers say that the changing regional geopolitical environment, especially the elimination of Iraq as a security threat, may make it harder for the military to demand large share of the budget for defense.
Editor’s Note: Nicolas Birch is a journalist specializing
in Turkish affairs.
3. - ABC News - "Kirkuk Reclaimed: Kurds Take Back Their City, Culture, and Stake in the Iraqi Oil Industry":
KIRKUK , Iraq / May 7, 2003
by David Wright
No place in Iraq has more to gain from Saddam Hussein's fall than the oil-rich Kurdish city of Kirkuk. And perhaps no place is more grateful for its liberation.
"Thank you Boosh and Bleer," reads graffiti spotted on a crumbling city wall; a misspelled thanks to President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain.
In a real sense, Kirkuk is the capital of a country that has never existed. Kurds think of its ancient city center as their own Jerusalem, yet they have never been able to secure a homeland around it. A nation of Kurdistan, if it were independent and unified, would be the size of Switzerland; instead, it spills across the borders of other autonomous nations, including Iraq, Turkey and Iran.
For decades, Saddam Hussein sought to remake much of Kirkuk and Iraqi Kurdistan in his own image. In an attempt to stamp out Kurdish culture, Saddam's regime flattened Kirkuk's old city, banned the Kurdish language, and offered Arabs from southern Iraq financial incentives to move north to the region, displacing thousands of Kurds.
As many as 5,000 Kurdish villages were destroyed, and more than 100,000 Kurds were slaughtered — some of them gunned down in the street, others tossed from the roof of Kirkuk's Saddam Hospital, their bodies left to decay by the side of the road. Human bones and other evidence of these atrocities surface almost daily.
"We know of 32 graves so far in this vicinity," an elderly Kurdish man disclosed this week.
New Life in Old Home
Now that Saddam has been unquestionably deposed, thousands of banished Kurds have returned to Kirkuk to reclaim their homes. Yet sorting out the many new property disputes that arise might prove difficult, because looters have torched most property records.
In the heady aftermath of regime change, freedom is taking on unexpected forms. There is optimism about what Americans have to offer, but many locals are also hedging their bets.
Every street corner is marked with the graffiti of one faction or another — even with the hammer and sickle. Last week, the communist party of Kirkuk held its first ever May Day celebration.
Freedom has also carried some surprising new priorities — such as television. Satellite dishes have become an instant fad: people drive to Kirkuk from as far away as Baghdad to buy them, even though a dish costs the equivalent of a six-month salary for a middle-class Iraqi.
"It's better than eating now," one Kurd says of television, "because we are thirsty for freedom, thirsty for these things."
Kirkuk's new local TV station, licensed by U.S. forces but run by independent local broadcasters, has a clear mission. "We have to tell people what is a democracy," the station manager explained. "That's the problem, they don't know anything about democracy."
As Kirkuk TV looks poised to explain it, democracy has a lot to do with free speech and open criticism of authority — and this time, that means of the United States.
"The first thing we're doing," the station manager said, "is making reportage among the people of Kirkuk, and ask them what they are thinking of the U.S. Army here, and how they see the U.S. Army inside Kirkuk, and what they want the U.S. Army and the U.S.A. to do for them in Iraq."
But because Kirkuk TV prefers not to showcase pre-war newscasters, and it hasn't had time to hire and train new correspondents, its anchors have been reading the news in the dark.
Prosperity at Baba Gurgur
Kirkuk residents expect peace and prosperity, and want to share in the wealth created by the Iraqi oil industry — of which their city is a major hub.
"This is what George Bush promised us, to bring Iraq into a very good position," one local, Abdel Rahman, explains. "We trust his word."
The next step is to make their dreams come true.
In the middle of the Kirkuk oil fields lies Baba Gurgur, a legendary pit of fire fueled by natural gas that seeps up from the soil. Break the surface, and the ground literally ignites.
Many locals believe these flames have been burning since life itself began; some say the site is the same "burning fiery furnace" mentioned in the Bible's Book of Daniel. Local custom is to come here, dig into and ignite the soil, and make a wish.
All across Kirkuk, people are waiting to see if their wish for prosperity — a freedom that coalition forces have made possible — will finally catch fire.
For now, some notice that a citadel high in the Kirkuk hills —
where the prophet Daniel is thought to be buried, and which, until
a month ago, was an Iraqi military base — has been made into
a public park.
4. - The Christian Science Monitor - "Cracks in Cyprus's 'Berlin Wall'":
Turkey's leader heads to the divided island this week as a conciliatory trend continues to grow.
KYRENIA, CYPRUS / 7 May 2003
by Michael Theodoulou
Many are pinching themselves to be sure it's real.
After three decades of separation by a concrete and barbed-wire barrier, Greek and Turkish Cypriots are suddenly mingling again and rushing to see their old homes and places of worship on the other side of the divide.
The scenes of reconciliation have encouraged hopes for an end to the divisions on Cyprus, which have been a major source of friction between NATO members Greece and Turkey. "This is now in the hands of the people," said Lellos Demetriades, the former mayor of Nicosia, the capital. "The politicians will follow."
Paschalis Nicolaou was among the first Greek Cypriots to cross the ceasefire line after a surprise decision two weeks ago by the self-styled Turkish Cypriot state to allow short visits. "The Turkish Cypriots were so friendly. We were driving through little villages and people came out of their homes to ask [us] to join them for coffee," says Mr. Nicolaou, a customs officer. More than a quarter of the island's 750,000 population have since made the trip across the UN-manned buffer zone.
"I'm indescribably happy," says Turkish Cypriot Mustafa Kasap, standing in Eleftheria (Freedom) Square, in southern Nicosia. "I know these streets so well. I have been watching and missing them from afar for 29 years."
The strategically located island has been effectively partitioned, dividing its ethnic Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities, since 1974. That was when Turkish troops invaded the north after a short-lived coup in Nicosia, inspired by the military junta then ruling Greece.
The UN, backed by US and European diplomatic muscle, has repeatedly tried to reunify the island. The latest, most concerted effort collapsed in March, a month before Cyprus, represented internationally by the Greek Cypriots, signed a treaty with the EU to join the bloc in May 2004. The UN blamed the failure on the Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktash, a veteran hardliner.
Diplomats suspect Mr. Denktash has now eased the travel restrictions in response to coaxing from mainland Turkey. If Cyprus is not reunited before the Greek Cypriots join the EU next year, Ankara's own bid for EU membership will be in peril. Denktash was also feeling heat from his impoverished and isolated people, many of whom have taken to the streets in recent months in unprecedented protests against his failure to secure a settlement. A peace deal would have allowed Turkish Cypriots to share the benefits of EU accession with the wealthier Greek side.
The EU and Greek Cypriot authorities have welcomed the Turkish Cypriot gesture on freer movement but insist it does not substitute for a peace deal. Difficult negotiations on territorial adjustments, power sharing, and property issues lie ahead.
"This is a very welcome start, and is giving the two communities the chance to get to know each other after 30 years," says James Ker-Lindsay, executive director of Civilitas Research, a Nicosia-based think tank. "But it by no means represents the start of a comprehensive political process towards a settlement. It's a very important part in peacebuilding, but it's no substitute for diplomatic negotiations."
George Iacovou, Cyprus's foreign minister, said Monday that the eased Turkish Cypriot restrictions on movement have not persuaded the UN to re-engage in settlement talks. "The UN secretary general [Kofi Annan] is not ready," Mr. Iacovou said. "What he wants first is for Turkey to change its stance and for Mr. Denktash to do the same." Dr. Ker-Lindsay agrees that Mr. Annan may be reluctant to rush back in: "He'll want to see where this is going before he invests valuable time on Cyprus again."
Diplomats in Nicosia are looking for signals from Turkey. Some Turkish Cypriot newspapers speculate that when Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan visits northern Cyprus later this week, he may announce the withdrawal of some of Turkey's 35,000 troops stationed on Cyprus.
Meanwhile, Greek Cypriot authorities have announced goodwill measures to improve living standards among Turkish Cypriots. The package will help Turkish Cypriots work and trade in southern Cyprus and gain access to healthcare and other state benefits.
Denktash, however, has cautioned that the "honeymoon season" may not last, because "the political reasons for conflict still exist."
Still, many here are confident that the new grass-roots contact between the two communities will increase chances for a solution. "We're still not there in terms of the political solution, but nothing like this has happened since 1974," says Nicos Anastasiou, a high school teacher. "The 'Berlin Wall' of Cyprus is now full of cracks and holes. Thirty years of prejudices and stereotypes have collapsed in days, along with the myth that there was no trust between the communities."
Touching stories emerge daily in the local media. A Greek Cypriot
couple returned to the house they fled as Turkish tanks rolled up
29 years ago - and found their wedding photos still hanging on the
wall. A woman went to thank a Turkish Cypriot who had saved her family
in 1974 - only to learn from his mother that the then-teenager had
been killed in action a few days later. Even as huge numbers of people
have crossed the divide, there have been only two reports of inhospitable
exchanges.
5. - Associated Press - "Turkey, BP Say Pipeline Project Proceeds":
ISTANBUL / May 7, 2003
The government of Turkey and oil giant BP said Wednesday that construction of a $3 billion oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea to a Turkish port on the Mediterranean was on track after the sides overcame land and construction problems.
The consortium building the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan pipeline had reportedly been complaining about delays from red tape, problems concerning purchasing land, and about political appointments to the Turkish state-owned pipeline company that is the project's contractor.
But in a news conference Wednesday, Turkish Energy Minister Hilmi Guler and BP project manager Michael Townshend said the pipeline would be finished by the end of 2004 and could be transporting oil in 2005.
"The project is continuing quickly and will finish on time," Guler was quoted as saying by the semiofficial Anatolia news agency.
The 1,760-kilometer (1,090-mile) pipeline aims to bring Caspian crude to the West, reducing dependence on Middle Eastern oil.
The United States has strongly supported the route through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey — considered a roundabout and expensive way — in large part because of strategic concerns. Shorter and cheaper routes for the pipeline would pass through Russia and Iran, giving those two countries heavy influence over the energy.
BP holds the largest stake in the project and is leading it.
6. - Milliyet (Turkey)- "Relations with the U.S. in the post-war period":
ANKARA / 7 May 2003
by Sami Kohen
What is Turkey’s place in the US’ Pax Americana in Iraq’s
postwar period?
How will the new policy of the Bush administration affect Turkish-US
relations from now on? The answers to these questions can be summarized
as follows:
1. Turkey isn’t at the forefront of Washington’s new strategy for now.
2. The problem of northern Iraq will be a key factor in Turkish-US relations in the days and weeks to come.
3. Despite certain current disagreements and problems, common bilateral interests will eventually lead the two countries back to cooperation.
Let’s examine in detail these three principles. Turkey didn’t
support the US before or during the war in Iraq, which caused disappointment
and anger in many Washington circles. The US administration hasn’t
let us off the hook yet, so it’s no longer treating us as a ‘strategic
ally.’ As evidence of this, Ankara wasn’t invited to a recent
international peacekeeping force
conference in London and is being shut out of projects for Iraq’s
reconstruction.
There are mutual fears and a lack of confidence in the aims of Washington
and Ankara. Basically the points of view of Washington and Ankara
on northern Iraq are different. The US is giving the Kurds, who fought
alongside it during the war, an important place in its strategy. Ankara
views this development with great suspicion and concern. The US is
discussing the establishment of a federal structure in Iraq, but Turkish
officials neither trust the Kurds nor welcome any plans for a federation.
If Ankara and Washington cannot see eye-to-eye, a new Iraq crisis
might lead to a very bumpy road in future bilateral relations.
In spite of all problems as I mentioned in the third item above,
Turkey and the US should formulate their policies on many issues so
as to again act together in line with their common interests. Even
if Incirlik Airbase’s mission is over, Turkey’s geostrategic
position and its standing as a political, economic and social model
for the region are still important for the US. Many in the US administration
think they can’t really afford to ignore Turkey. US pragmatism
will eventually lead to a rejection of a ‘hands-off attitude’
towards Turkey. Ankara needs to pursue a more serious-minded, realistic
and steadier strategy on northern Iraq, and it should act with the
US in a more coordinated way. Most importantly, both Turkey and the
US should focus their relations not on missteps from the recent past,
but rather with eyes firmly fixed on the era to come.