|Monday, 13 July 2020|
Cyprus PIO: Turkish Press and Other Media, 03-02-11
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.28/03 11.02.03
[A] NEWS ITEMS
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
[A] NEWS ITEMS
 Statements by the Turkish Cypriot leader before and after meeting President Clerides under UN auspicesIllegal Bayrak Television (10.02.03) broadcast that the Turkish Cypriot leader, Mr Rauf Denktas and President Glafcos Clerides met again today within the framework of the direct talks aimed at finding a lasting solution to the Cyprus problem.
In a statement before the meeting, Mr Denktas noted that there will be no meeting on Wednesday and the next one will be held on Friday.
Following are Mr Denktas/ short statement and his replies to journalists/ questions:
As you know, there will be no meeting on Wednesday, we will resume the talks on Friday. We will see if we can launch a give-and-take process today.
Question: Mr Clerides said that he has some documents, unrelated to the talks, presaging a solution in 2003 depending on certain international developments. But he is not divulging them because he says he does not want to do a favour to Turkey.
Answer: If its revelation benefits Turkey he will definitely not divulge it to me either. I know nothing about these documents.
Question: Could it be an election-related maneuver?
Answer: It is a cryptic statement. We will see what it means in time. I repeat: It is pure cruelty to maintain these talks during this election campaign. The Greek Cypriots cannot come up with any proposal at the talks, which they will only use as a means to exploit everything we say. Really, they are frittering away our time. This is really shameful.
Question: Would a change of interlocutor on the Greek Cypriot side after the elections negatively impact the talks?
Answer: I will not comment on this issue at all, because if I reply to these sort of questions it might be construed as support for one candidate or the other and would spell defeat for the candidate perceived enjoying my support.
Question: Mr Clerides slightly revealed his sine qua nons yesterday. He says he will secure the return of 100,000 [Greek Cypriot refugees], as property remains inviolable.
Answer: Each side is upholding its own cause, we too are upholding our own cause.
Following is the short statement and replies to questions by Mr Rauf Denktas after the almost two-and-half-hour meeting.
Yes, today, we defended our document, which we had prepared in light of the suggestions made by the "Republican Assembly". We were expecting a written reply from the Greek Cypriot side to our document, which we had tabled yesterday morning in keeping with a previous agreement. But no written reply came. They merely expressed their views regarding our defense of our document. In short, we were the ones who talked exclusively today. We received nothing from the opposite side. As such, no give-and-take took place.
Question: Did you alone speak for two and half hours?
Answer: Yes we did, they also interjected occasionally. But the situation did not develop as we had hoped.
Question: Did the Greek Cypriots table their sine qua nons?
Answer: No, they did not. As such, on Friday, we will continue from where we left off today.
Question: Do you believe they would submit them on Friday?
Answer: Whether I believe or not is not important, we will see on Friday.
Question: Did you mention anything about the 3rd plan to the UN?
Answer: No. I did not talk about the 3rd plan.
Question: Is there really such a plan, have you heard anything about it? We only hear about its existence.
Answer: So do we. We too hear about its existence. I do not want to comment on this issue at all before we are given some serious information.
Question: For the last two weeks, the Greek Cypriots have not been tabling anything, it seems they are fully absorbed with the election campaign.
Answer: Indeed, I again protested today. The convening of these meetings during the election campaign is a great injustice done to both sides. I raised this issue at the table once again.
Question: What was their response?
Answer: The Greek Cypriots remain silent. The UN remains muted and does not say anything, it only listens and takes note of my complaint.
 Speaker of the Turkish Grand National Assembly Bulent Arinc on CyprusAccording to KIBRIS newspaper (11.02.03), on the occasion of the Kurban Bayram the Speaker of the Turkish Grand National Assembly, (TGNA) Bulent Arinc,referred to the Cyprus problem and said that they have to follow up with attention the on going negotiation in Cyprus . He added that this process is as important to Turkey as to the Turkish Cypriots and Turkey is closely interested in this process.
Arinc said : "The settlement of the Cyprus problem should secure the existence of the Turkish Cypriots and safeguard their personal and material wellbeing. It should also safeguard our kinsmen's existence in a peaceful and prosperous environment".
He went on and said that Turkey, as in the past at present as well, will continue to support the "just struggle" of the Turkish Cypriots.
 Persons who live in the Neochorio Kythreas village started collecting signatures to show their support to the UN PlanYENI DUZEN (11.02.03) under the title "We want solution and EU", reports that the persons that live in the occupied village of Neochorio Kythreas started collecting signatures in order to show their support to the UN Plan.
According to the paper one of the reasons that led the persons of the village to move on with this, besides their will for solution, was to show their reaction to the actions of the village's headman. As the paper reports, the "muhtar" went to the Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas and, without asking or receiving approval from the people, told him that the villagers support Denktas. Stating that they did not give authorization to the headman to say what he did, the villagers started collecting signatures stressing that they consider the Annan Plan as a basis for solution, peace and EU membership.
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
 NATO vase is brokenUnder the above title Turkish Daily News (11.02.03) publishes the following analysis by Ozgur Eksi:
The French and Belgian veto to the U.S. request to start planning in NATO put Turkey in a difficult position. Turkey, the only NATO ally to border Iraq, asks that NATO Article 4 be put into practice. Analysts discuss whether Turkey is at risk or not with the veto and whether NATO is at a critical stage.
Middle East Technical University professor Huseyin Bagci is very pessimist about the future of NATO. He summarizes his views as follows: "The vase is broken. Turkey cannot trust NATO anymore."
According to Bagci, the French and Belgian veto is a very critical decision. He thinks that Turkey cannot trust its ally anymore.
When considering the reason for the veto Bagci declares that France, Germany and Belgium acted together in order to win time on the Iraqi issue. Bagci mentions that Germany and France do not consider U.N. resolution 1441 enough to initiate a war on Iraq and they look for more time to solve the issue peacefully. In deep politics however, Bagci underlines that France does not want the U.S. and Turkey to be in NATO and in Europe. "France wants to establish the European army and this is part of its European Security and Defense Policy. France wants to expel the U.S. and Turkey."
Bagci criticizes Turkish Foreign Minister Yasar Yakis's approach to the issue. He states that the issue has nothing to do with timing. He indicates that NATO was established in order to defend its members against any attack but three members/ perception of threat is different than the U.S. and Turkey/s. "There was a separation between the Atlantic and Europe for a long time, now we see the separation on the institutional issues. NATO is the first of its kind."
Bagci states that Turkey will get in closer relation with the U.S. and will loose its relations with the EU since this decision. He underlines that Germany and France are playing an important role in the EU and that they are not in favour of Turkey acceding to the EU.
Subtitle: The veto is not that bad
Retired ambassador and former undersecretary of the Foreign Ministry, director of the Foundation of Turkish Economic and Social Studies, Ozdem Sanberk states that what Belgium, France and Germany are doing in NATO is part of their consistent policies.
He states that Article five of the NATO requires an occurrence of an attack and that there is no attack on Turkey. He explains that putting article five into practice requires a logic of war and that this undermines Turkish consistency about the Iraq issue. "Turkey states it is against war in Iraq and supports peaceful means, but article five puts NATO in a war situation. Turkey as a NATO member will be in war according to the article. Sanberk underlines that Turkey must continue its efforts and preparation but shall not urge NATO to get in the logic of war early.
Sanberk indicates that U.N. inspector Hans Blix's next report will be presented soon to the U.N. and that it is more appropriate to wait for the report since there is no pro-war development in the U.N. "There will be an extra time to evaluate Blix's report and NATO can decide by then."
Sanberk states that an early NATO decision is not in favour of Turkish interests. "Germany and the Netherlands send air defense missiles Patriots. Neither is in an unfriendly attitude with Turkey."
According to Sanberk what U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wants from the NATO reveals former discussions in the EU. "The U.S. needs Turkey on the Iraqi issue and Rumsfeld's action aims at providing popularity in Turkey for U.S."
NATO Article five reads: The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, that NATO article five refers to, reads: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain inter- national peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
 SABAH columnist suggests Turkey to annex the occupied part of CyprusColumnist Ergun Babahan, writing in SABAH newspaper(10/02/03) under the title "America and the Principles", refers to an article published in Washington Post newspaper the other day in which the US Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, suggests that the territory occupied from the Arabs by the Israeli Army in 1967 is the territory which Israel has the right to keep, and says that with this statement the US Defense Secretary wants to say that there is a price to be paid if one loses the war: "However," adds Babahan, "it is difficult to understand the USA Republican Administration which supports such a policy in Israel, but in Cyprus it maintains a different stance.
If one follows Rumseld's logic the Greek Cypriot side in 1974 had created unilateral conflict aimed at annihilating the Turkish side from the Island. The civilians were its direct target. Turkey called on the other guarantor powers to stop this, as did Israel, but no one heeded and as result Turkey intervened unilaterally, and was victorious. With the same token, the US Defense Ministry should adopt the existing situation in Cyprus and defend the present division in the island. Since in Cyprus, as well, there was a war and Turkey won it. The great America which is preparing to fight for principles in Iraq would not, most probably, have to follow different principles for Israel and Turkey.
Following the same policy in Cyprus could create some problems for America with the EU, but it seems that these days Washington is not going to give much attention to this.
If Rauf Denktas could meet Donald Rumsfeld and Ariel Sharon of Israel prior to the talks, then not only would he acquire important tramp cards regarding the bargain that he would enter with the Greek Cypriot side ,but he would clearly strengthen his position as well.
What do you say?" Babahan concludes.