|Tuesday, 19 January 2021|
Cyprus PIO: Turkish Press and Other Media, 02-06-25
Cyprus Press and Information Office: Turkish Cypriot Press Review Directory - Previous Article - Next Article
From: The Republic of Cyprus Press and Information Office Server at <http://www.pio.gov.cy/>TURKISH PRESS AND OTHER MEDIA No. 118/02 22-23-24-25.06.02
[A] NEWS ITEMS
[B] COMMENTS AND EDITORIALS
[A] NEWS ITEMS
 Interview by the Turkish Cypriot leader with KIBRIS TVKIBRIS (21.06.02) reports that KIBRIS TV broadcast last night an interview with Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktas. Mr Denktas talked on the programme "Platform" of Suleyman Erguclu, General Director of the KIBRIS Media Group. Following is part of the interview, as published in KIBRIS:
"ERGUCLU: Something is going on during the last few days with the Cyprus problem, sir. The one development is following the other. Lord David Hannay has made a statement, as you know. It got the Greek Cypriots very angry. He referred to a new state, a new partnership. He noted that a great distance was covered on the security issue. Afterwards, Vergheugen, EU's Commissioner responsible for the enlargement, talked and accused you of not being constructive. Today (yesterday) we read in the main editorial of Cyprus Mail newspaper that 'Negotiations Broke Down'. In this article they say the following: They say that the Greek Cypriot administration thinks that the talks entered an impasse on the security issue and that nothing else is left to be discussed. Within this framework they say that the meeting planned for tomorrow (yesterday) was cancelled, that they are planning to ask UN Secretary-General's Special Advisor Alvaro de Soto to meet with the sides and put an end to the impasse and that the meeting planned for tomorrow (today) was cancelled. Now, if you like, let us take these issues form the end. Why was the meeting planned for tomorrow (today) cancelled? Are we talking about an impasse here?
DENKTAS: Now, before everything else let me tell you this: there is no such thing as cancelling the meeting tomorrow (today). I think that esteemed Clerides will go to the Seville Summit. The European Union will be meeting. Therefore, he said he would go on Friday and asked this himself. That is, it was planned to be cancelled (translator's note: the Clerides - Denktas meeting on Friday). Yes, it was cancelled but the negotiations have not ended. This is obvious from the programme I have announced to the Press. We are going to have meetings until 2 July. We are not having a meeting this Friday we do on Tuesday. We are meeting on Friday and next Tuesday. This will last until July. Is it not a shame to say this thing to their own people but especially to the world? Why? They did everything they could to make us run away from the table. We patiently overcame this. The reason is the following: it is written that the negotiations will go on based on the principle that 'nothing is agreed until everything is agreed'. Until now we have been putting into a framework, into a square, the matters upon which we were not able to reach an agreement, we leave them and continue. We discussed the security issue. We seem like we have reached an agreement on some matters on the security issue. When afterwards we evaluated between us an issue where we were about to reach an agreement we saw that this is something that we should discuss again. We said this and they raised hell about it. No, either it stays as it is or it will end there, we said. This cannot be done. This cannot end, because we have some things, which we should discuss on the security issue. Therefore, come let all the 'chapters' finish and after that we discuss the issues, which we have put in a square. Maybe these will have no importance when we agree on those things, which follow. We work like this. No, they say that either this will remain as it is and we accept what they want or they will accept nothing. I understood it immediately. This was obstinacy without a reason. I say, let us put it into square and go on. They say 'no this cannot happen'. Very well let us discuss the functions, the structure. 'In fact we did this'. We did this but we did not finish it. There is no end. We have to discuss it again. We have a new approach. We say let us adjust the relations of the common government with the EU according to the Belgian model. Let us discuss this. Ok, if you take the Belgian model you have to take the whole of the constitution. Can such a thing be done? 'No, either you do it this way or you do it otherwise'. 'Very well, have you studied the whole of the Belgian Constitution? Have you studied if it suits you, if it suits Cyprus? We want just this point and we are taking only this. Here is a country with its own characteristics, its own conditions. 'No, either you take the whole or nothing'. As I said, let us discuss the functions, the structure. Let us finish with the security and we continue there are still a lot of matters. 'No', Clerides said: 'in that case I will withdraw all the steps I have made so far'. Very well, do this but let us continue. No we cannot. After that de Soto took both of us alone in a room. There I said that we could discuss again the functions that I wanted to talk about the way of our joining the EU with the Belgian model and that there are some problems. Clerides repeated again his opinion that 'either you take the whole of the Belgian model or you take nothing'. After that I said ' then let me take a look at the whole of it. I am not running away'. Because it is obvious that he wants to make me run away. Let us take a look at the whole of it I accept this. Come with the whole of it on Friday and we shall discuss it. 'I will be leaving on Friday'. Very well let us discuss it on Tuesday. It is done. What are we going to discuss on Tuesday without being prepared, let us talk about the territory, I said. You know that on the territorial issue we cannot discuss unless our territory is based on our sovereignty. However, I will listen to you. We shall answer to whatever you say, but we shall not and cannot finish this.
ERGUCLU: This approach does not show goodwill, does it sir? Because the territorial aspect is one of the issues where frictions will be.
DENKTAS: This is what they want. They want frictions and the negotiations to be broken off. I realized that now. We have decided the following. Mr de Soto said 'I would go to New York at the end of the month. Now I will go on 3 July. Therefore, let us have one meeting in July and thus end the session. We accepted this as well. That is a programme that was accepted. Because I knew what he is aiming to do as soon as he comes and that he would go to Seville and say 'the Turks ruined it again, Denktas ran away again', I announced this programme to the papers, as you know. .However, there is something in these statements, which is the most important of all. Our people should know this well. They say that the only thing we want to gain from the negotiations is to solve this thing without becoming the side responsible for breaking off the talks. That is, they want to be able to say to the EU, when the day comes that 'we did everything we could but the Turks did not, they are to be blamed'. Of course this is a sad development. I am now saying these and I am not violating the black out, because I have to answer these. This is a direct propaganda attack to deceive the world. We have to answer it.
ERGUCLU: If we come to the issue on which there are problems sir, the security issue.
DENKTAS: .We want everything to be clear. The rights and the powers of the guarantor powers is another 'chapter' and the duties and powers, which will be given to the soldiers of the UN is another issue. We have to separate the one from the other. The one thing is this. The other thing is that these powers must not be the same. Otherwise there will be a complicated situation. .However, according to our estimates we saw efforts to turn UNFICYP into an organization, which will be above the guarantors. .We have some more things to discuss and we shall see it again. If we are satisfied, it will pass. Until now we are not. .As far as Lord Hannay's statement is concerned he did not make a statement with which he seems to fully understand us. There are some things, which we wanted him to say and which he had to say but these were his assessments and views. I know that he made a realistic summary. As I said he did not fully satisfy us but did he make such a big crime that he should be attacked? And they immediately began to threaten about the bases. .Now Verheugen has made accusing Denktas a profession. He has not something nice to say about us and there are two reasons for this. Either he does not know the Cyprus question and does not feel the need to learn it or because of his German origin, in the name of Germany he is continuously setting forward the Cyprus problem in order to prevent Turkey from joining the EU. .What is the greatest difficulty for me at the talks? Everything. .
ERGUCLU: .Ismail Cem made yesterday an evaluation. He thinks that the fact that Verheugen criticized you is due to your saying "no" to the multinational force on the security issue.
DENKTAS: He may think so, because in the past the Greek Cypriots insisted a lot on this multinational force. We have seen what this multinational force could do in Europe. We, together with Turkey, are totally against this, because this will mean a force above the guarantor powers.
ERGUCLU: Very well sir. Have you taken something from Alvaro de Soto with this development today? Have you had a contact with him?
DENKTAS: Alvaro de Soto will meet with us within this week. He will discuss this matter too. During Tuesday's meeting he was too surprised, because his position is standing between the two sides. He could say nothing to him (translator's note: to President Clerides) or to me in the presence of both of us..
ERGUCLU: .Let us come to Lord Hannay again sir. He may not satisfy us 100 % but for a long time now the British always disappoint us. Until now they move accepting some realities, which are not the truth, in spite of the fact that they knew they are not. It seems that this begins to stop with Lord Hannay's approach.
DENKTAS: This is so to an extent, because what do we want? Do we want the two leaders to sign the agreement after the conclusion of the talks? No we do not. Who are these two leaders? One of them says ' I am the President of the Republic of Cyprus' and the other ' I am the President of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus'. And they are going to take the agreement they will sign to their institutions. By signing this agreement there will be no new formation. You will take it to your authorities and they will take it to the Parliament. And it will make a referendum law. The parliament will approve the result of the referendum. Therefore, at that point the authorities of the TRNC have to say "yes" because the form of the TRNC will change.. At a point, for a single day, for a while the two sides have to recognize each other, for this agreement to turn into an ideal thing. .Now Lord Hannay comes until this point. He says that sovereignty could not be accepted. In fact the referendum will stress that you are sovereign, he says.. Now, let us look at our framework, what is our framework? We want an agreement based on two geographies, which will not be ruined again. Of course the name of this geography for us is TRNC and it is a state. According to the others this is a founding state. According to others, it is a small state. We are calling it a sovereign founding state. .Now what then is it that we want? We shall look after our affairs totally separately from the Greek Cypriots, we shall have separate judiciary, and we shall not be under the control of the Greek Cypriots and look after our affairs independently and freely. We shall have, a Parliament, police, courts, and government. All these, however, have been accepted. .
ERGUCLU: If there is a problem in the future and the central government collapses and is seized by the Greek Cypriots we shall have a ground on which to step.
DENKTAS: Let it not be ruined. Let the ground remain for us too. This is what we are saying. We want the agreement to be in such a way that if it collapses they will not be able to say to the world 'this is our internal matter'. These are vital issues for us. We do not ask for much. We are continuing. .The Greek Cypriots want the Greek Cypriot refugees to come back. We say no, this issue will be solved with global exchange and compensations. Because, in 1977 we did not say to Makarios that we want bi-zonality, just for fun. We did not uproot the people from their places and brought them here in 1975 just to have a picnic. Saying to these people after 29-30 years to go away and that they cannot live here because they are not the old owners, is something, which concerns the human rights. Secondly, bi-zonality was accepted because living together is and will be dangerous for clashes. .
ERGUCLU: ..We say that if we join the EU after an agreement, we want to see Turkey as well here. Either we join the EU together or we join it having made a special adjustment, but we want to see Turkey by our side.
DENKTAS: At least, we want a confirmation that Greece, as an EU member-state, will not have more rights and authorities than Turkey and we want to be specially protected against this until Turkey becomes a member.
ERGUCLU: .Now as a result, you will be discussing the territorial aspect on Tuesday.
DENKTAS: Yes, we shall be discussing the territory on Tuesday.
ERGUCLU: He will be talking and you will be listening.
DENKTAS: He will be talking, I will be listening and give the necessary answers, but we are not ready to discuss the territorial issue on a map. Because, it is not yet clear whether or not the territory, which will remain to us, will be sovereign.
ERGUCLU: On Friday you will discuss the Belgian Constitution and you will proceed, you say.
DENKTAS: We shall proceed. .".
 Press Conference by the Turkish Cypriot leader on the talks for a solution to the Cyprus problemIllegal Bayrak Television (21/06/02) broadcast a live press conference by Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas in occupied Nicosia. Denktas begins his statement by declaring: "The talks are continuing. They will continue until we gain our rights and until a lasting agreement is reached that safeguards the rights of the Turkish Cypriot people and that will not take us back to the 1963-1974 period. I feel the need to say this, because the Greek Cypriot press is continuously engaging in the propaganda that the impasse, the dilemma, the difficulty in the talks stems from the Turkish side. As you know, the latest development that forced me to stage this news conference consists of the statements and headlines to the effect that the talks have come to an end.
What do we want? What are we trying to do? We have actually outlined this in our 29 April document. However, I would like to point out the following broad outlines. We are exerting efforts to establish a lasting partnership that is based on two founding states, that has an international identity, and that cannot be undone again. Based on two founding states and having an international identity. In other words, we are trying to establish a joint partnership state that can engage in relations with the EU and that will have a place in the United Nations, a partnership state that cannot be undone again. The residual powers that are left over from those that will be given by the founding Turkish and Greek Cypriot states to the new partnership, namely to the central government, will be exercised by the founding states themselves. This model was also incorporated in the Set of Ideas. This is the truth, the correct version, and there is no other way.
One founding state will not have the right or the power to interfere in the affairs and authorities of the other. As institutions that emphasize the identity and equal status of their peoples, the founding states will be able to play effective roles in the international arena, within the scope of their authority. This exists in Switzerland, Canada, and Belgium. Within the scope of their own authority, they will be able to play an effective role in the international arena.
The founding states will have legislative, executive, judicial, and police organs, and their territorial integrity, constitution, and security will be separately guaranteed by their respective guarantor motherlands. Turkish and Greek troops will be deployed in the Turkish and Greek Cypriot founding states, in numbers that will be determined, and one will not have the right to enter the other founding state.
The Turkish, Greek, and British guarantors will guarantee the agreement to be reached in its entirety, as was the case in 1960. The laws enacted and the executive decisions made by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus [TRNC] and the Greek Cypriot administration until now will be valid on condition that they are in compliance with the new partnership.
The equality and sovereignty of the Turkish Cypriots are not negotiable. It is not possible for the Greek Cypriots to rule over the Turkish Cypriots or impose their political will on them on the basis of numerical majority. One side will not be able to claim sovereignty over the other, nor will it be able to claim sovereignty over the whole of Cyprus, under any condition. In other words, it will not be possible to repeat the events of 1963. It will not be possible to claim: This did not work, therefore, I will represent the whole state, the whole island.
These agreements will be reached in order to prevent a recurrence of the 1960 events, but if such events do occur, it will not be possible to claim to the outside world that this is an internal affair. This is the framework. In our 29 April proposal, we outlined how we will flesh out this framework. This framework incorporates the territorial issue, the status of the territory that will be ours, and the solution of the property issue by means of mutual compensation and exchange. It is evident that measures such as establishing specific delegations and preserving the buffer zone will be needed to prevent the creation of dangerous situations immediately after the conciliation until Turkey also joins the EU. We are ready to negotiate these. The Greek Cypriots' return to their property in the north under the claim of restitution is unacceptable, because it would create dangers and friction, it would eliminate all the aspects of bizonality that pertain to security, and it would perpetuate the disquiet. However, it will be possible for a specific number of Greek Cypriots to settle in the TRNC region in a legal framework, within a quota, and in time, in a way that will not harm us or threaten our security. It is essential that the new generations do not experience the pain that we suffered.
This framework was received positively by diplomats who are in contact with us. No one had or has any objections to it. How will we flesh out this framework? If the framework is accepted, and if they also foresee a new partnership state, our conflict with the Greek Cypriots can be resolved. The statement made by Lord Hannay -- even if it does not fully satisfy us -- is more or less a model of this framework. It is a model that refers to most of the facts outlined and underlined in this framework. I repeat -- despite the fact that it does not fully satisfy us. I believe that the outcry created by the Greek Cypriots in this regard also gives us a message."
Denktas goes on to allege that as long as the EU continues to tell the Greek Cypriots that they are the legitimate government and they are the best candidate, the Greek Cypriots will not agree to share something with the Turkish Cypriots and establish a new partnership with them. Denktas also alleges that the Greek Cypriots are trying to apply sanctions on Britain because of this statement, as they do to all diplomats who defend a "reasonable framework." If diplomats bow to "this blackmail," Denktas warns, the Greek Cypriots' "spoiled attitude" will continue, and "it will become more evident that they have no view beyond deceiving the EU." Denktas says that all the Greek Cypriots want from the current talks is not to be blamed by the EU "when the Copenhagen day of reckoning comes."
Denktas asks Glafcos Clerides: "Let us start the necessary detailed negotiations along the lines I outlined a while ago and assist us in concluding this matter." He goes on to recount the events of the last meeting, and explains the disagreement that arose in that meeting. Denktas says that "in our opinion, the Greek Cypriot side, which agreed to the continuation of the UN force with a new mandate, wants to equip the UN peace force with the authority of an international force, as a rival for the guarantor forces, and even elevate it to a higher status. We may be wrong, but this is our assessment." Denktas states that the Turkish Cypriots will not be forced to flee the talks, "we will defend our rights, and we will seek the ways to reach a conciliation with goodwill." Denktas asks the Greek Cypriots to renounce their goal of acceding to the EU without the Turkish Cypriots and to adopt the path of conciliation.
In reply to a question, Denktas says that he wants to discuss the Belgian model, "the aspect that pertains to its relations with the EU. There is separation based on two languages in Belgium. They are very different and very sensitive. They appear to have gathered under a federal roof, and they are advancing toward a confederation. We extracted the aspect of how they cooperate with the EU." Denktas adds that whenever the Turkish Cypriot side wants to take an aspect of a model or a constitution, the Greek Cypriots propose to adopt the entire constitution.
Denktas states: "This agreement will either be reached or it will not be reached. If it is not reached, it will not be our fault. It will be because of the Greek Cypriot intention of running away with the whole of Cyprus under the guise of legitimate Cyprus government. We will not be fooled by these tactics."
Answering another question, Denktas claims that EU Commissioner "Verheugen is serving the interests of a circle in Germany that is opposed to Turkey's membership in the EU. He knows that there will be a crisis and the relations between Turkey and the EU will be adversely affected if only the Greek Cypriot side is admitted into the EU. Therefore, by saying that the Greek Cypriots will be admitted regardless of an agreement, he is aiding and abetting such a crisis. I hope that is not the case. His insistent statements, however, are aimed at totally undermining our talks. They have no other meaning. No other diplomat has done this. In Europe, they are increasingly spreading the word that the Turkish Cypriot side, Denktas, and Turkey are the ones that are creating the difficulties. This is because they are placing the Cyprus issue as an obstacle before Turkey."
Asked about what he sees on the horizon, Denktas responds: "First of all, I see the framework that I outlined. Seeing that many diplomats and states accepted this framework, we can settle the Cyprus problem within this framework, so long as there is no one sabotaging it from the inside. Let everyone carefully examine this framework, say that our representative and Turkey are on the right track, and support us on matters that will be included in this framework. Let them not undermine us."
In response to the possibility that Alvaro de Soto will submit a written proposal after the discussion at the United Nations, Denktas says: "If after assessing the stand of the two sides, he wants to eliminate himself by submitting a written proposal, and he wants to lose his credibility, then he will do that. A goodwill mission is not a mediation mission; it consists of enabling the two sides to talk and helping them. Alvaro de Soto is doing this. He also comes to see us when difficulties arise. He is conducting his goodwill mission in a spirit of goodwill. I think he must continue this for some time."
 Reply by Rauf Denktas to a question on the Seville summitIllegal Bayrak Radio (24/06/02) broadcast that the Turkish Cypriot leader, Mr Rauf Denktas met with the Luxembourg ambassador to Cyprus today, and conferred with him for some time. No statement was issued to the press in connection with the contents of the meeting. A journalist asked him: The final communique of the EU Seville summit foresees the membership of a single-voice Cyprus. What is your opinion on the subject?
In reply Denktas said that if two equal and sovereign states reach an agreement, a structure with a single voice that can establish normal relations with the EU can emerge. This is an appeal directed at the two sides, not only at us, Denktas noted, adding that the Greek Cypriots should also act in line with this understanding. Denktas pointed out, however, that at this point the Turkish-Greek balance should also be established.
 The Democratic Turkey Party's views on CyprusRadikal newspaper (22/06/02) publishes an interview with Democratic Turkey Party Leader Mehmet Ali Bayar.
Following is Mr Bayar/s reply to a question on Cyprus:
Question: Can you comment on Cyprus and the way it affects Turkey's accession to the EU?
Answer: Cyprus is different from the EU. Turkey cannot give up the island. The Turkish Cypriots are an equal partner. They will be the cofounders of the new structure. That is in Turkey's interest. Finding a solution to the problem before the island joins the EU is also in Turkey's interest. A just and viable solution has to be found on the basis of equality.
 Devlet Bahceli defends his party's positions on EUTRT 2 Television (23/06/02) broadcast that Deputy Prime Minister Devlet Bahceli has said that taking Turkey to the EU at all costs is not the NAP's [Nationalist Action Party] mission.
He was speaking during festivities in Antalya's Korkuteli District. In his speech, Bahceli stressed that the point reached in the process of adaptation to the EU shows the NAP was right, and added:
"It was a grave and unfortunate mistake to link the start of the accession talks to the immediate and total abolishment of the death penalty, to education and broadcasts in the mother tongue, and to the Cyprus issue. There is a huge difference between the reality and the foggy atmosphere of the world of dreams and virtual trains being created by certain circles that, for years, did nothing but make EU propaganda to the Turkish nation. In fact, our lofty nation is carefully following how both the promises made at the EU summit held under the chairmanship of our honourable president to unconditionally support the immediate and total abolishment of the death penalty and to Kurdish education and broadcasts, and the similar promises made after that summit, are now being taken back by being linked to certain conditions or through simple political manoeuvres."
Bahceli said that the NAP will not accept that the EU approached the Cyprus problem from the Greek, Greek Cypriot angle. He said: "No matter what anybody says and under all conditions, we will continue to loudly announce what we think is right and what we believe in, in line with our love for Turkey."
 Ismail Cem assessed the EU summit of SevilleCNN TURK Television (23/06/02) carried a live interview with Foreign Minister Ismail Cem by Murat Yetkin and Mete Belovacikli in the Cafe Politics, program.
The interview took place after Cem's return from the EU summit in Seville on 22 June.
Asked to comment on the final declaration issued at the end of the Seville summit, Cem says that foreign policy is based on interest, and since both Turkey and the EU have mutual interest in the former's membership, their ties are advancing and will continue to advance. He goes on to say that at the Seville summit, he and his colleagues from the Foreign Ministry felt that Turkey and the EU are no longer on two opposite sides, and that "they have reached a stage where they assess things together."
Cem points out that the Turkish Foreign Ministry made sure that the paragraph on Turkey was included in the final declaration, and adds: "In the end it was not a fantastic outcome, but a normal one. That is what I expected. We did try to see if we could achieve more. The honourable prime minister wrote a very good letter to the Spanish prime minister. In the end, however, what we got was normal, natural. The declaration said that Turkey is continuing to advance in line with the basic EU democratic criteria, that the EU was receiving this with pleasure, and that if these criteria are met, new decisions will be reached. The concept of new decisions was placed in the declaration in response to our demands. I wanted a terminology that was slightly different than in Laeken."
In reply to a question, Cem says: "Let us not make the mistake of linking the Cyprus question to that. We always put ourselves in a difficult position and then the outside world uses it against us. There is no Cyprus condition. Cyprus is a political factor; it is not a condition. If we meet the political criteria, the EU cannot say that it refuses to start the accession talks due to the Cyprus problem. If it does say that, we have a lot to say in return. It will not be that easy for it to say that. There are laws, there are the EU acquis. In other words, it is impossible for the EU to do that. Therefore, if we want to start the accession talks, then we must meet the political criteria."
Asked to comment on the conflicting reports about Turkey's response to an offer regarding the European Security Defence Policy, Cem says that they are all untrue. He explains: "The EU army and NATO must reach an accord. Turkey, the United States, and Britain held a meeting on the basic principles of this accord and reached a decision. The United States represented itself and NATO, and Britain represented itself and the EU. Greece objected to those principles, I believe due to domestic political considerations. The objection was not to us but to the EU, which was about to accept this accord. Greece did not want to accept this accord. So the other EU countries decided to formulate an accord that would satisfy Greece and that would be in line with the accord reached by Turkey, the United States, and Britain. We are ready to make our contribution to that accord. We are not enemies with the EU. We will make our contributions with pleasure, on behalf of NATO. One day before the Seville summit, an impression was created as if the 15 countries agreed on the accord and that Turkey was probably going to accept it too. I have denied that."
Cem says Solana offered to work with him on the accord throughout the night so that they could sign it the next morning, but that he told Solana this was impossible. This is a serious matter and cannot be resolved overnight, Cem stresses, adding: "It is completely untrue that Turkey rejected the accord. Such allegations are deliberate. We were not given an accord, how could we reject it? To present us with an accord, the EU members must agree on it first. They have not agreed on such an accord."
Cem emphasizes: "Everybody should realize that we will not deviate from the Ankara Agreement."
Yetkin asks Cem if he thinks Turkey can do more regarding its EU membership, given the current domestic political situation and the lack of harmony among the coalition partners in connection with the EU. Yetkin also reminds him that he is being shown by some of the media as an alternative prime minister. Cem replies that "at this stage, a government problem would be dangerous." He also affirms that "a change of government would not be useful for Turkey at this stage."
Cem says that if the Assembly fails to pass the necessary laws on time, it can do so later. Asked what he means by "later," Cem replies that the EU reforms may be discussed within the coalition at a later date, or by the new government after the scheduled elections. He stresses that the government should not be disbanded just because it cannot agree on the EU reforms. He says: "Even though I am the strongest advocate of the need to carry out the reforms in order to join the EU, I am concerned that if the government is disbanded, Turkey will regress in many fields, including in its ties with the EU."
 The Turkish President assessed the conclusions of the Seville SummitTRT 2 Television (22/06/02) broadcast that following the EU summit held in Seville, Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and Foreign Minister Ismail Cem held a news conference.
Sezer assessed the final declaration's paragraph on Turkey, as follows:
"In the final declaration, the EU does not make any negative comments on Turkey or on the Cyprus question. We all basically agree that once Turkey fulfils the Copenhagen criteria, the negotiation process with the EU will begin. The EU members affirmed this during the meeting. Let me say this in connection with the Cyprus issue: Mr. Denktas made some very comprehensive proposals. We expect the negotiation process to go on, and the Greek Cypriot Administration to approach and respond to Mr. Denktas' comprehensive proposals with goodwill." Asked if the EU's expectations can be met or not, Sezer replied:
"I believe that full membership in the EU is the only Westernisation goal upheld by our lofty leader Ataturk from the day our republic was established in 1923. I believe that the EU is the end goal of civilization and the concrete manifestation of the value attached to the supremacy of law, democracy, and human rights. Therefore, I believe that Turkey cannot be left outside this integration with the Western world. The Copenhagen political criteria must be fulfilled in the shortest possible time. It is now up to our politicians. I believe that the Turkish Grand National Assembly will soon find a way to eliminate the obstacles, and to enact the necessary laws in order to fulfil the political criteria." In reply to a question, Foreign Minister Cem said that Turkey will continue to advance toward the EU.
 The pseudostate will be represented in the Islamic Conference meeting and the Crans Montana ForumIllegal Bayrak Radio (22/06/02) broadcast that Tahsin Ertugruloglu, so called Minister of Foreign Affairs and Defence, left the occupied areas today to attend the 29th Organization of Islamic Conference [OIC] Foreign Ministers meeting in Khartoum, Sudan, from 25 to 27 June. All issues concerning the Islamic countries, including the Cyprus issue, will be discussed during the meeting. Delegates from 60 countries will participate. Ertugruloglu will deliver a speech on the Cyprus issue at the meeting.
After the OIC meeting, Ertugruloglu will attend the Forum to be held in Crans-Montana in Switzerland from 27 to 30 June. The pseudostate has been represented at the Forum since 1997. Ertugruloglu will hold talks with political circles there in connection with the Cyprus issue.
The Turkish Cypriot delegation will return to the occupied areas on 1 July.
 Mesut Yilmaz: Full membership of Cyprus to the EU requires Turkey's approvalAnkara Anatolia (24/06/02) reported from Brussels that State Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz said on Monday that the main target, while determining Turkey's targets toward the European Union (EU), was taking a full membership decision in 2007, and being a full member in 2008.
Yilmaz, currently in Brussels to attend the annual meeting of the European Convention where the future of Europe was discussed, held a news conference.
Yilmaz said Turkey should not be left behind Bulgaria and Romania, noting that the target could be reached in case a decision is taken in the Copenhagen Summit to initiate full membership negotiations.
Responding to a question, Yilmaz said full membership of Cyprus to the EU required Turkey's approval even if the problem in Cyprus is solved, stressing that the issue could be brought to the international jurisdiction organs by Turkey if necessary.
Yilmaz said an agreement could not be reached yet within the government regarding the Copenhagen criteria, noting that Parliament would recess. Yilmaz said the Parliament would convene extraordinarily in case a compromise is reached.
 Angolemli describes as "positive" the outcome of the Seville Summit regarding CyprusORTAM (25.06.02) reports that Huseyin Angolemli, leader of the Communal Liberation Party (CLP) has described as "positive" the outcome of the Seville Summit regarding Cyprus.
Speaking yesterday after a meeting with Trod Jensen from the Norwegian PRIO-International Peace Research Institute and Ane Braein, representative of the Peace Organization, Mr Angolemli said that the results of the Seville Summit were as "expected" and expressed the opinion that he Summit gave a message to the Greek Cypriot side as well, by noting that Cyprus will be accepted to the EU regardless of the fact whether there is a solution to its political problem, but at the same time it adds that the efforts exerted towards finding a solution will also be taken into consideration.
Furthermore, Mr Angolemli pointed out that his party agrees with Turkey's Deputy Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz and True Path Party leader, Tansu Ciller who had expressed the opinion that progress should be made in Cyprus by 24 October.
 Erel accuses the "authorities" of the pseudostate of not doing much on the issue of finding a solution to the Cyprus problem and Cyprus's joining the EUKIBRIS (25.06.02) reports that Ali Erel, chairman of the Turkish Cypriot Chamber of Commerce (TCCC), said yesterday that the authorities of the pseudostate do not exert much efforts on the issue of reaching a solution to the Cyprus problem and Cyprus's joining the European Union.
The paper writes that, speaking during meetings with the trade unions of the Turkish Cypriot "Public Servants" KTAMS and KAMU -SEN and the Union of Chambers of the Turkish Cypriot Engineers and Architects, Mr Erel noted that the organizations in the occupied areas must have more contacts with each other and "put forward the real needs of the community".
Mr Erel announced that the TCCC has started visiting the "non-governmental" organizations in the occupied areas aiming at defining a common vision on the issue of the solution of the Cyprus problem and the accession to the EU.
 Turkish Minister to pay an illegal visit to the pseudostateKIBRIS (25.06.02) reports that tomorrow Turkey's Minister of National Education, Metin Bostancioglu will illegally visit the occupied areas of Cyprus, in order to participate in the graduation ceremony of "Bulent Ecevit Anadolu High School".
The paper writes that Mr Bostancioglu will meet with Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktas and other "officials" of the pseudostate. The Turkish Minister is expected to return to Ankara on 27 June.
 The pseudostate demands stolen antiquities from BavariaKIBRIS (23.06.02) reports that Turgay Hilmi, so-called "honorary cultural attache" of the pseudostate in Bavaria, has demanded from Germany the stolen antiquities stolen from the occupied areas of Cyprus and have been found in Munich. According to the paper the antiquities are worth about 25 million Euros.
Talking during a reception given in the Castle of Nurnberg by Gunter Beckstein, Bavaria's Minister of Internal Affairs, in honour of the foreign representatives in his country, Mr Turgay asked Mr Beckstein's help for the return of the antiquities.
The German official has reportedly promised that he would closely be concerned with the matter and added that he would telephone Mr Hilmi.
 The Chairman of the Union of Turkish Chambers of Commerce and Stock-Exchanges Hisarciklioglu meets Verheugen.According to Hurriyet (23/06/02), the Chairman of the Union of Turkish Chambers of Commerce and Stock Exchanges, (TOBB), Rifat Hisarciklioglu had a meeting in Brussels with Gunter Verheugen, EU Commissioner for Enlargement, during which they exchanged views regarding Turkey's EU process.
Stressing that democratic reforms are very important, Verheugen said that what has been done is not enough and that there are a lot of things to be done for the EU. Referring to Cyprus Verheugen said: "After reforms the second important issue is Cyprus, even if we say that 'it is not a condition ' one cannot deny the political relation between these two issues. On this issue some efforts were made but the only positive thing at this moment is the continuation of the talks. It is six months and we have yet to see concrete results. I am not directly involved in the issue. However, what I got from the UN is that Denktas should demonstrate more flexibility."
Referring to the veto issue Hisarciklioglu asked: "At this moment we are already face to face with the Greek veto threats against Turkey and vetoes. What will be the guarantee, if a political solution is found tomorrow, that South Cyprus' EU membership will not be another threat of veto before Turkey? '' And Verheugen answered: "There is no guarantee. Veto is a right emanating from the full membership. Every EU member can exercise this right tomorrow, not Cyprus but, for example Denmark or any other EU member could exercise its right to veto against Turkey's membership''.
In his turn the TOBB Chairman said: "In that case that country will give a logical explanation for its veto, but in the case of the South Cyprus we see that its objection would be based on more emotional and illogical reasons to get revenge rather than logic. The Greek Cypriots should not have right to veto. They should be stopped being an obstacle to Turkey''. In reply Verheugen said: "For me, Cyprus's accession should be after the political settlement. From your point of view the best thing is that Ankara should give a clear and with no uncertain terms the message that it wants solution of the Cyprus problem. Personally I am not against the United States of Cyprus. Turkey is the key. And my real interlocutor is not Denktas but Turkey''.
When claimed by Hisarciklioglu that Cyprus's accession is not a guarantee regarding the rights of the Turkish minority, Verheugen said: "The EU membership in itself is the guarantee that the Greek Cypriot majority cannot impose oppression on the Turks. All the rights of the Turkish Cypriots will be guaranteed within this framework'' .
[B] COMMENTS AND EDITORIALS
 Columnist in Star newspaper describes Mr Sukru Sina Gurel as "the most hawkish of the hawks"Star newspaper (21/06/02) publishes the following commentary by Semih Idiz under the title: "Cacophony in Turkey-EU Relations": The full text of the commentary is as follows: "News indicates that the Turkey-EU Joint Parliamentary Commission (JPC) meeting held in Brussels was turned into a "battle ground" for the "opposing" factions of the two sides. For one side, there was Joint Parliamentary Commission Co-Chairman and Netherlands Member of Parliament Joost Langendijk and, for the other, State Minister Sukru Sina Gurel. They chose to bring the cacophony (defined as "dissonance" or a "harsh sound"), which is never absent in the background of relations, to the fore this time.
To state things more clearly, the two persons chose to "irritate each other by speaking of sensitive issues," as if deliberately trying to raise tension at a time when the two sides were in search of a reasonable, rational, and constructive groundwork prior to the Seville summit. News reports from Brussels make this quite obvious.
Tension first rose when Langendijk, who seems to have a problem with Turkey on every topic, asked Gurel concerning Cyprus: "Are your views about annexation still the same?" The ill-motivated question was based on the misperception that Turkey would annex northern Cyprus if the Greek-Cypriot sector joined the EU. The question also requires that the person being addressed remain perfectly calm while answering it. That is for certain.
However, it can be seen that Mr. Gurel chose to add fuel to the fire instead of staying in control of his nerves. According to the local and foreign sources I spoke to in Ankara, this approach by Gurel, who is known as "the most hawkish of the hawks" anyway, should be considered "natural," considering his usual views. He creates the impression at times, in fact, that he is guided by his own agenda, not the government's.
Within this general framework then, Gurel, in reply to such a rude question, said, "When speaking of annexation are you referring to the North or to the island as a whole?" Now let us ask ourselves a question and answer it honestly. Did such a reply add to our prestige or did it give the opposing factions on the other side a card to play against us? Journalists reporting on this "exchange" stated that Gurel's answer "created an icy atmosphere in the room."
I believe the Turkish side of the JPC could feel the chill in the air, too, because this approach was not constructive, but totally destructive. Gurel should have stayed calm upon hearing Langendijk's crude outburst and should have clearly put forth Turkey's stance on the issue. Actually, in the end, Gurel did explain that Turkey does not desire annexation, but enhanced integration. The explanation, however, came after the clouds had really moved in and I presume "passed unnoticed" under such circumstances.
What makes this more likely is that an angry Gurel went on to say, "Cyprus cannot join the EU until Turkey becomes a member," an expression even Mr. Denktas no longer uses, and by doing so, Gurel increased the tension. I do not remember when I last heard Ankara or the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus use such rhetoric, which is in fact wishing for the impossible. However, Gurel's intention was clearly not to eat the grapes, but to "beat up the farmer."
Of course, Langendijk did not hesitate to press on with his crude attitude in the tense environment he helped create. Using an inappropriate analogy, he said, "Turkey should start a dialogue with the Workers Party of Kurdistan as was done in the example of Northern Ireland." While making such a proposal, he ignored the fact that neither Britain nor the Republic of Ireland ever engaged in direct dialogue with the IRA.
It is true that both countries entered dialogue with the Sinn Fein, the political wing of the IRA. However, this was the result of an almost 40-year deadlock. Whether or not Turkey is at such a point now is extremely debatable. Besides, dialogue has not yet solved the problem in Northern Ireland. The Netherlands deputy, however, preferred to disregard this fact, too.
Langendijk's aim, obviously, was not to debate these issues in a civilized manner. He desired to irritate the other side by means of a force bolstered by his own prejudices. That is obviously what he was after. Sadly, there are many among us who are ready to respond in kind to such crude behaviour instead of approaching the issue in a rational, logical, cool and reserved manner. The consequences of this are clear: a destructive, not constructive cacophony in relations between Turkey and the EU."