|Thursday, 2 April 2020|
Cyprus PIO: Turkish Press and Other Media, 02-10-02
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. 187/02 02.10.02
[A] NEWS ITEMS
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
[A] NEWS ITEMS
 The Turkish National Security Council discussed possible US operation against IraqTurkish Daily News (01/10/02) reports that Turkey's powerful National Security Council (NSC) held its monthly regular meeting yesterday and discussed a possible U.S. operation against Iraq.
Following the two-and-a-half hour meeting held at the Cankaya Palace on Monday, NSC secretariat issued a brief statement stating that the council discussed the possible U.S. operation's effects on Turkey and its region.
The statement went on that the council also debated the general security incidents throughout the country and the external political developments that were related to Turkey's security.
Besides Chief of General Staff Gen. Hilmi Ozkok and Land Forces Commander Gen. Aytac Yalman, Gendarmerie Commander Gen. Sener Eruygur attended his first NSC meeting yesterday.
 Turkish Parliament blocks election delayNTV television (01/10/02) broadcast that Turkey's parliament voted to recess on the day it returned from a two-month break, foiling an attempt to cancel November 3 elections seen as key to reviving investor confidence in the government.
In the assembly's hand-vote there were "at least 21 more members of parliament in favour of the proposal" to recess, Parliament Speaker Omer Izgi said.
Those who wanted to postpone the elections tried unsuccessfully to block the vote so parliament could remain in session and consider their proposal.
Cancelling the elections could throw the nation into political turmoil, push government borrowing costs higher and threaten its ability to pay back $140 billion of debt.
The anti-election forces can try to call parliament back into a special session to debate their proposal.
Today's vote shows they don't have the necessary votes to approve the delay.
 EU Ambassadors to Turkey stressed that the Cyprus problem is an important obstacle in front of Turkey's full EU membershipAnkara Anatolia news agency (30/09/02) reported from Ankara that the Union of Turkish Chambers and Commodity Exchanges (TOBB) Chairman Rifat Hisarciklioglu hosted a breakfast with the participation of ambassadors of member countries to the EU.
Holding a press conference following the breakfast, Hisarciklioglu said: `` The Turkish parliament has made the vital changes prior to the EU`s Copenhagen Summit in December. Turkey has fulfilled its responsibility. From now on, we, including political parties, should work to convince the EU to set a date for the beginning of accession negotiations. ``
When asked whether or not the ambassadors were concerned about
Turkey's putting into practice the EU adjustment laws, Financial
Development Foundation Chairperson Meral Gezgin Eris said that they did not share the concerns about the issue.
``There is a great political compromise and social support for the legal arrangements and constitutional amendments. There was no change in the political compromise and social support. The political determination and social support are the guarantee for Turkey's putting into practice the adjustment laws. We will explain this fact to our friends in the EU, `` she said.
Responding to a question on the expectations of the ambassadors about Turkey's full membership, Hisarciklioglu said: ``It is a political decision. The ambassadors told us that they would inform their governments on today's meeting. I believe that the EU would take a political decision in favour of Turkey at the Copenhagen Summit. ``
Upon a question on the expectations after the elections in Turkey Hisarciklioglu said that there were some concerns.
Stating that they said at the meeting that Turkey had been showing a perspective included in the European community for 200 years whatever a political view was formed after November 3, Hisarciklioglu said: ``Turkey had showed its determination on that issue 200 years ago. Turkey showed it during the foundation of the republic. To this end, we have no concern on that issue. ``
The representatives of other non-governmental organizations also explained their views.
Hak-Is chairman Salim Uslu said: ``The concerns on the elections are resulted from us rather than the EU, `` adding that some political parties` representatives` speeches that EU process would be interrupted with the election results were later used against Turkey.
Stressing that politicians should be very careful nowadays when there is election stress, Uslu said: ``The Fundamental preference of Turkey regarding the EU is based on social demand and support. Giving up this is impossible. The decision that will be taken in Copenhagen will have an important meaning, but does not mean everything. I don't think that EU membership would be postponed as long as Turkey fulfils regulation changes and meets the requirements. We demand EU standards.
I believe that the new government and the parliament that would be set up, would not overlook the fundamental preference of the Turkish society. ``
Turkish Contractors' Union Chairman Nihat Ozdemir stressed that Turkish contractors worked in many countries of Europe, adding that Turkey should be taken within the enlargement process.
Foreign Economic Relations Committee Chairman Rona Yircali said they would launch busy lobby activities in the coming two months.
Mehmet Rifat Akyuz, the Chairman of the Turkish Chamber of Agriculture Union, said that they listed the things that have been done in agriculture in the meeting.
Turkish Young Businessmen's Committee Chairman Erhan Ozmen said:
``We have taken very important steps on EU. We made 80-90 percent of our homework. Negotiation date should be set for us from now on.``
Meanwhile, ambassadors of the EU countries brought onto the agenda the implementation of the adjustment bill, and whether or not the atmosphere that would appear after November 3 elections, would cause any change in Turkey's policies.
Representatives of NGO`s said there was nothing to feel concern on the issue.
The EU ambassadors stressed that the Cyprus problem constituted an important obstacle in front of Turkey's EU full membership. An ambassador said: ``A solution point should be reached on the Cyprus problem till December. Otherwise, this problem will negatively effect the membership negotiations.``
 The Turkish Cypriot leader clarifies his statement that the U.N. Secretary-General should not propose anything at the New York talksIstanbul CNN TURK Television (30/09/02) broadcast that the Turkish Cypriot leader, Mr Rauf Denktas, left for the United States today to attend the Cyprus talks in New York on 3-4 October. In a statement at Istanbul's Ataturk Airport, Denktas clarified as follows his remarks yesterday that the Secretary-General should not propose anything:
"This is what I meant when I said that he should not put anything on the table: We do not want anyone to impose a framework on us and tell us to reach an agreement within that framework, or impose a map on us and tell us to accept it. Otherwise, the Secretary-General will naturally convey to us his own views and assessments, and we will discuss them. However, the Secretary-General's mission of good offices does not consist of producing a document and imposing it on the sides. I am not concerned about pressure, because I am a person who is used to pressure for 30 years. Of course, they will pressure; we are acting in an environment of pressure. We want to take a unifying step. The Greek Cypriot stand, however, consists of: There is a Cypriot state, the 1960 state; its sovereignty is single; this is not negotiable; therefore, an agreement must be reached on this principle. This is a wrong attitude; it is not a unifying stand. It is a cross-eyed stand that sees one where there are two. We cannot accept it."
 Turkey and the pseudostate step up the process of integrationNTV television (01/10/02) broadcast the following: "Ahead of the possible accession of the Greek Cypriot administered southern part of the island of Cyprus into the European Union, Turkey and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) have moved to step up the process of integration between the two.
Under an agreement reached on Monday, Turkish Cypriots will be allowed to hold Turkish nationality, even if they do not reside in Turkey itself. In another move to try and end the international isolation of the TRNC, which is only recognised as an independent state by Turkey, Turkish Cypriot athletes will be able to represent Turkey at sporting events and enjoy the same residence, employment and property rights as Turkish citizens.
"These regulations will help deepen the existing co-operation and solidarity between the two countries," said Turkish Foreign Minister ªükrü Sina Gürel at the ceremony to mark the signing of the agreement.
Other articles of the accord allow for work to commence to bring Turkish Cypriot laws into line with those of the European Union and boosting co-operation between the police forces of the two countries."
Meanwhile, the Turkish and the Turkish Cypriot press (01.10.02) publish the new agreement under the following titles:
KIBRIS: "Partial integration"
YENI DEMOKRAT: "The time for economical integration came"
HALKIN SESI: "Step by step integration"
VOLKAN: "Another step on the road for the integration with our Motherland"
RADIKAL: "Step towards integration"
 UCP calls on Denktas to stop being the negotiator in the Cyprus talksAFRIKA (02.10.02), reports that the newly founded "United Cyprus Party" (UCP) in its first political statement, calls the Republican Turkish Party (RTP) and the Communal Liberation Party (CLP) to ask Rauf Denktas to abandon his duties as the representative of the Turkish Cypriot side in the Cyprus talks.
According to the paper UCP suggests that Denktas must be relieved of his duties as negotiator in the Cyprus talks, because he does not take into account all the agreements made regarding the Integrity of Cyprus and because he works in favour of a permanent partition formula.
 Ecevit: Cyprus' accession to the EU before the solution of the Cyprus problem will not be the end of the world, even if Turkey will not be pleased by such a developmentTurkish mainland HURRIYET (01.10.02) publishes an interview with Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit, who responding to a question regarding the Cyprus problem and the accession of the Republic of Cyprus to the European Union before a solution, said that if this happens it will not mean that the end of the world came, even if Turkey will not be pleased by such a development.
The interview was given to Oktay Eksi, Muharrem Sarikaya and Sedat Engin. Under the title "We shall resist until the end in Cyprus", the paper publishes the following questions and the answers given on Cyprus:
"Eksi: Cyprus is standing before us again. What are you saying about it?
Ecevit: I think that we must resist until the end on the Cyprus issue. The Cyprus issue cannot be seen as one of the preconditions for the full membership to the EU. We shall act with determination. We have to do this. Perhaps, some intellectuals and some politicians in Turkey do not share this opinion, but I think that the great majority of the public opinion does not share their view. The TRNC cannot be regarded separated from Turkey. There are two separate states in Cyprus, two different nations, religions and languages. You cannot unite them together by force. The Czechs and the Slovaks have said 'we shall be separated now" and no one said anything about it. They were separated. In Cyprus there were many more serious reasons for separation. Secondly, the existence of the TRNC is of vital importance for Turkey's security. Especially, after the Baku - Ceyhan pipeline the importance of the TRNC was totally increased. Therefore, we shall act with determination on this issue. I know that some circles are getting angry with us. Some intellectuals in Istanbul behave in a way that I cannot understand. We shall resist until the end to this problem.
Sarikaya: If during the EU Summit in Copenhagen no date is given to Turkey for starting its accession negotiations and if they approve the full accession of the Greek Cypriot administration, shall we return back to the 1997 Luxembourg crisis in our relations with the EU?
Ecevit: The Greek Cypriots may be taken to the EU alone. Even if we shall not be pleased with this, the end of the world will not come because of it. However, if the EU ignores the TRNC and enters into such a road, then of course serious problems will occur.
Sarikaya: Could an interim formula be found? For example could the TRNC be given some assurances for the future, in case of a Greek Cypriot full membership?
Ecevit: As a matter of fact, this is what Denktas and Clerides are searching for now. The TRNC cannot be left forever in such helplessness. It is natural for us to take measures about it. If necessary, a couple of more steps will be made in the future on this issue. There are examples about it, such as for example the independent island states. There are independent republics bound to England or Denmark. They have their own flag, their own laws, but from the point of view of the foreign relations there is a general model bound to the mother country. I do not know it well, but there is also the Belgian formula. All these could be discussed. However, as I said, if the EU behaves in such a way, then it will create very harassing problems. Think for a moment and this. On the one hand you have an island state with a 600 thousand population and on the other hand you have Turkey with its almost 70 million population and its continuously increasing importance in the world. In the one scale of the balance is Turkey and in the other is an island state with a 600 thousand population.
Sarikaya: If the EU gives Turkey a date under some conditions, what will be the approach to this?
Ecevit: It will not be right for me to bring onto the agenda a formula now. The important thing is the following: The existence, the independence and the freedom of the TRNC cannot be denied. It is not possible for Turkey to accept this".
 Saint Georgios church in the occupied village of Elia Morphou has been destroyedKIBRIS (29.09.02) reports that inhabitants of the occupied village of Elia Morphou complain about the fact that Saint Georgios church and a water cistern in the village have been destroyed. The paper writes that the villagers are complaining because they consider both the church and the cistern to be historical monuments.
According to KIBRIS, the inhabitants of Elia have said that two years ago some "officials" of the so-called "Antiquities Department" had visited the village and estimated that the value of the church was five billion Turkish liras. "After that no one cared about this historical monument", they added.
 YENIDUZEN publishes an opinion pollYENIDUZEN (02/10/02) in its front leader page under the banner headlines "There is no trust in Denktas!" publishes an opinion poll conducted by KADEM (Cyprus Social Research and Education Consultancy Centre) for YENIDUZEN newspaper. The opinion poll was held between the last week of August and the first week of September and a total of 987 persons above the age of 18 were asked.
The results of the opinion poll show that the number of the respondents, who don't trust the Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas, reached 51%. In addition to that the 70% of the respondent Turkish Cypriots don't trust the so-called "TRNC" Assembly either.
The results of the opinion poll are the following:
1. How much do the Turkish Cypriots trust the Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas?
-The Turkish Cypriots are divided on the issue of trusting Rauf Denktas:
I trust too much: 24.2% I trust to a certain degree: 21.3% I hardly trust: 24.7% No trust: 26.0% No answer/ No opinion: 4.3%
Results by educational level: How much do you trust Rauf Denktas?
General Elementary/Gymnasium Lyceum/Degrees I trust too much: 24.2% 30.1% 32.6% 23.7% 16.9% I trust to a certain degree: 21.3% 28.7% 17.4% 16.8% 25.1% I hardly trust: 24.7% 15.4% 17.4% 28.1% 27.7% No trust: 26.0% 22.1% 25.6% 28.7% 23.8% No answer/ No opinion: 4.3% 3.7% 7.0% 2.8% 6.5%
Results by town, village:
General Towns Villages I trust too much: 24.2% 24.5% 23.8% I trust to a certain degree: 21.3% 22.9% 19.4% I hardly trust: 24.7% 27.5% 19.9% No trust: 26.0% 20.6% 32.0% No answer/ No opinion: 4.3% 4.5% 3.9%
The Turkish Cypriot faith in Denktas and "TRNC Assembly"
Rauf Denktas "TRNC" Assembly I trust too much 24.2% 8.6% I trust to a certain degree 21.3% 17.2% I hardly trust 24.7% 37.4% No trust 26.0% 32.4% No answer/ No opinion 4.3% 4.4%The paper (02/10/02) continues the publication of the opinion poll on how the Turkish Cypriots see the European Union:
- Under which conditions must the Turkish Cypriots join the EU?
1999* 2000* 2002 To join immediately. (even if the Cyprus problem is not solved) 9.8% 21.3% 24.3% Only after the solution of the Cyprus problem 28.8% 42.7% 34.8% Only after the solution of the Cyprus problem and after they invite Turkey for full accession to EU 15.9% 30.0% 38.3% After the solution and after they give to Turkey the status of candidate 36.0% The status of candidacy was already granted The Turkish Cypriots must never enter EU 6.4% 2.8% 0.6% Others 3.1% 1.3% --- No answer/opinion --- 2.0% 2.0%
(* The figures of the years 1999-2000 were according an opinion poll conducted by COMAR.)
According to the opinion poll the number of respondents, who wanted to join the EU only after a Cyprus settlement, was reduced to 34.8% from 42.7% in 2000. Only 0.6% of the respondents want the Turkish Cypriots not to enter into the EU at all.
To the question how it will affect the Turkish Cypriots if only the Greek Cypriots join the EU, the results were as follows:
Positive effect: 10.1% Negative effect: 76.8% No effect: 9.4% No answer/opinion: 3.7%
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
 On one hand the law and on the other "by force".Under the above title Arif Hasan Tahsin, in his commentary in the column "Facts and Realities" of Afrika (01/10/02), criticizes Denktas for following policies of the 1940's and '50s and for accusing the Cyprus government of playing Byzantine games with its application for EU membership.
The commentary is as follows:
"Mr Denktas has said that the application by the Greek Cypriots to accede to the EU is a Byzantine intrigue. What else has Mr Denktas said? He said that the U.N. Secretary-General should place no proposals on the negotiating table. But why? Because they are not ready, it is claimed. Well, but if the Secretary-General puts proposals on the table what will Mr Denktas do? He will take them and come to the country to debate them.
What did Mr Denktas want to say?
Do not dwell at all with what Mr Denktas said or did not want to say. Do not search for anything new from Mr Denktas' sayings. There is no difference between what he says today and what be was saying in 1948 and in 1957. There is not much difference in the policies he follows either.
In 1948 he was saying that if necessary we shall get to the mountains, and both in 1958 and 1959 he repeated that the earth could be covered with black smoke. Is he not repeating the same threats today at every opportunity?
By saying 'Mr Denktas' one means fight, noise, blood, tears, pain and poverty. In a few words Denktas means negative.
In this country nobody was left thinking that Denktas will be benefiting the Turkish Cypriots, that he will open the future, he will prepare the ground for the new era or that he will reach an agreement so that the level of the Greek Cypriots' prosperity is reached. As a matter of fact those who support Denktas, say that they attach no importance to any of the above-mentioned. You will understand that their gain will be the flag's shade.
If you want to dwell on this, in fact it is words said by Mr Denktas that the Greek Cypriots' application for EU membership is a Byzantine intrigue.
Is it really a Byzantine intrigue this behaviour by the Greek Cypriots?
First of all what is a "Byzantine intrigue?" It means "Byzantine Politics?" Very well, but is it a shame or illegal for another state to adopt the policy applied by the Byzantine Empire? Or what was to be said is that this policy is monkey business?
In that case the following question should be posed.
In which policy is there no monkey business? Is there no monkey business in Turkey's politics? In that case what is the basis of the Turkish politics?
Byzantine historians say that Byzantium was not destroyed, but islamised. What is the meaning of this? It means that on the foundations of the Ottoman there is Byzantium. Besides, it could not have been otherwise.
Did the around two hundred thousand persons from Central Asia, who started to migrate to Anatolia in 1029 (One thousand twenty nine) with their herds, have any experiences of the settled organized state? And in whose lands did they settle when they came to Anatolia? Of the Byzantine. Among which communities did they settle? Greek, Armenian and Kurdish. Who were ruling during the Byzantine period? The Greeks.
May we pose another question to refresh our memories?
Who held the greatest share in the institutions of the Anatolian Seljuk and Ottoman states?
Who constituted the greater part of the established Ottoman Empire and its administration?
Mainly the Greek and other Balkan countries.
This being so, Byzantine intrigues became part of the blood, the spirit and the gene of the Turks. In other words the Turkish side follows Byzantine politics. Since it is so where is there any difference? Since the origin belongs to the Greeks, Greeks are better in applying this.
Apart from this, the Turks were left out of the Ottoman Administration, they lacked state experience and as a result they were left behind the Greeks.
What is the difference in the policy applied by the sides as regards the Cyprus problem?
The Hellenic side, the Greek Cypriots and Greece, put weight on the international law, and the Turks on the "Force Policy" (Avradini)
What is the meaning of "Force Policy"? Policy by Force, that is, policy based on muscle...
And the outcome?
It is good that the world was not left in the hands of the Greeks and the Turks."
 Demand Cyprus in return for IraqUnder the above title Mehmet Ali Birand writes the following in his regular column in Turkish Daily News (02/10/02):
The United States is going to hit Iraq.
How and when it will hit Iraq is not certain.
Turkey has no choice.
It is involved in this business whether it wants or not, whether it accepts it or not. It will definitely play a role. There is no way it can say, "This is not in line with my interests. I will remain outside of this operation."
If we declare on every occasion that we have entered into a strategic partnership with the United States, if we get support from Washington whenever we find ourselves in dire straits, we should consider it natural that this time we are being asked to do something. In international relations there is no such rule as, "I will get my way all the time." Sometimes the other sides demand something from you.
We are at such a point on the Iraq issue.
Since this is the situation, since we will not be able to get out of this bind, let us at least get something in return.
The confusion over 'cost' growing
You must be remembering the calculations of the cost of the 1991 Gulf War. At first that was $25-30 billion. In the latest instance, Foreign Minister Gurel spoke about a $200 billion loss. Obviously a veritable "auction" is taking place.
This time too the predicted cost is as high as $150 billion. The reasoning is one of, "The greater the potential loss figure we mention the higher will be the amount we will grab from the United States." It is as if the United States is too naive, that the United States does not know how to do calculations!
We should know that with this kind of reasoning we cannot get anywhere.
If you want, come; let us seek from Washington support in Cyprus and for the Turkish drive to obtain a date from the European Union in return for the Iraq operation.
Rather than drawing up absurd "tabs" let us try to get something tangible, something we can get easily.
Who knows, maybe this bargaining is already being done!
The Greek minister that tells the truth
Akis Tsohatsopoulos is Greece's development minister. In the past he served as defence minister and energy minister. He is a leading name in PASOK.
He is the person who, during the time he served as defence minister, due to the easing of the relations with Turkey, he cut down the defence spending, teaching the Greek army to keep its expenditures down to its resources. During the time he served as energy minister he attached importance to cooperation with Turkey.
His statement, which appeared in the Elefterotipia magazine over the weekend, was extremely important:
"The more Turkey comes closer to Europe the less tension it will have with Greece. If, on November 3, the Turkish people opt for the path leading to Europe, the latter must respond to that. Meanwhile, Greece must assume a leadership role in the European Union."
His words boil down to the following:
"When Cyprus joins the EU, Turkey must definitely be given a date and Greece must lead that approach."
The Greek minister is one of the few Greek politicians who believe that Turkey's joining the EU would be extremely beneficial for Greece -- and is brave enough to say that in public.
If Kerkuk falls into the hands of the Kurds...
The Eurasian Strategic Studies Centre (ASAM) Chairman Umit Ozdag drew attention to a very important issue during the Monday episode of the Manset program:
"If Barzani and Talabani include Kerkuk into the federal structure in a way that it would be included in the Kurdish region and if they turn the Kerkuk oil revenues into the resources financing the Kurdish state, Turkey will have to stage a military intervention."
In every way Northern Iraq is a quagmire for Turkey. The wisest approach would be for us not to step into that quagmire. However, the possibility mentioned by Ozdag requires that we review all our assessments.
For the first time Talabani and Barzani are fully making claims on Kerkuk and the oil deposits in that region. And they are not giving the Turcomans any say on this issue.
This is a new situation. In the past too such things had been mentioned and discussed. However, never in the past this demand had been articulated so openly.
The analysis made by Ozdag is important.
A Kurdish state that controls the Kerkuk oil would stand a greater chance of getting stronger and getting independent. That would have negative repercussions in the region in general and in Turkey in particular. Therefore, that must definitely be prevented.
We must debate that possibility extensively. Can the Kurds take such a step without obtaining America's blessing? Would not Iran too send troops into the region in case of a Turkish intervention? Would not the region be plunged into even greater turmoil in the end?
Rather than being preoccupied with the election cacophony it would be a lot wiser to seek answers to these questions in the next few weeks.