|Friday, 6 December 2019|
Cyprus PIO: Turkish Press and Other Media, 03-06-03
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.102/03 03.06.03
[A] NEWS ITEMS
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
[A] NEWS ITEMS
 Rauf Denktas: Instead of building 20,000 homes, the US, or others, should give that money for compensation of Greek Cypriot propertiesUnder the title "Let them give the money" YENIDUZEN (03.06.03) reports that the Turkish Cypriot leader, Mr Rauf Denktas, met yesterday with the members of the new administrative board of the Turkish Cypriot Journalists Association under Mete Tumerkan. Speaking at the meeting, Mr Denktas said that the most important duty of the press is to defend the truth courageously. Noting that the freedom of expression is only circumscribed when it comes to libel, Denktas said that the media reports on the problems of the country are, however, incongruent with the realities.
He said: "If de Soto has gathered a wrong impression about this country, it is only because the media said things that were diametrically opposite to what we have been saying, because it created the impression that the people want something other than what we have been saying. Those who today still defend the Annan plan, as if it was sent from heaven, should at least also explain the grounds on which they stand. In that way neither the people nor their readers would be deceived.
The question is whether we are going to stand up for our state. If we are not going to stand up for our state and sovereignty, then no matter what they give to us we will simply remain a minority, it is that simple.
Today I replied to some questions put to me by a newspaper. It is said that Bush is going to build 20,000 dwellings here. What does this confirm? It only proves that at least 80,000 Turks will become refugees. That is the figure you obtain if you multiply 20,000 by a four-member family. Yet, this is being applauded. Would you believe it, this is being applauded. Whereas, rehabilitation cannot be achieved by housing alone. The rehousing will not solve this problem. Instead of building 20,000 homes, the United States, or others, should give that money for the compensation of the Greek Cypriot property over here and thus solve the Cyprus problem radically. Some days ago one of my classmates visited me. He is a Greek Cypriot, a graduate of the English School. He has become a millionaire. He told me that he could not find some of the property left behind here, as in their places houses and other buildings have been erected, and that he sees no point in returning here and wants instead compensation. Another person accompanying him, again a person of importance, said the same thing. He says the compensation issue should be resolved, as they and their children have now comfortably settled down.
The path of peace should not be obstructed with the mania of return. People saying this are growing in number. Why? Because they see the realities. And what do our people crossing over there see? They see that the Greek Cypriots have left no place for them to return. They have expropriated, demolished, or razed to the ground most of the property. So, how could all these be resolved? Surely not by recognizing the right of return to the Greek Cypriots as de Soto envisages, for the Turks have lost their own right of return. Their rights have been abolished. The problem can only be solved through compensations. And we can accomplish this fast, if the Greek Cypriot side is ready for it. We can do it real fast. Then everybody will feel relieved and know what to do next.
Foreigners write to me asking what will happen if there occurs a regime change. We reply: Regardless of whether a regime change takes place or not, a northern state will exist. But there will not be any peace as long as the rights it has recognized, the agreements it has concluded, and the title deeds it has issued are not considered valid. Why not? Because chaos will ensue, that is why. Because, half of the Turkish people cannot be uprooted and rehoused. There can be no such agreement.
As such, if the media dwells on this matter and realties, if it, motivated by hostility to Denktas, does not deceive the people by talk about the beauty of the Annan plan, then the outside world too will start learning something new. The Greek Cypriot side still considers us pseudostate, they say pseudo-office, pseudo-man, pseudo-court, pseudo-police. But now that they are coming here they are seeing who is really the pseudo one, they or us. And I am pleased that many sensible Greek Cypriots are seeing the realities and the type of the solution. As I said, some of our colleagues should not go around duping people by saying such things as: The Annan plan will be revived, under the Annan plan the Greek Cypriots will come back and the Turkish Cypriots will move into newly-built apartments, and some of our compatriots will sell bricks and get rich. No one has the right to uproot a country, a community, and its members with such expectations."
Mr Denktas also asked for recognition of the so-called title deeds given by his regime to the Turkish Cypriots and settlers from Turkey who live in the properties of Greek Cypriots.
 ORTAM newspaper: "Denktas is the last supporter of the last wall in the world"Under the banner front-page title "The last supporter of the wall", ORTAM (03.06.03) reports that there is still one leader in the world who supports the existence of walls and adds that the Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas supported yesterday the existence of the wall which divides Nicosia and which after the collapse of the Berlin wall is known as the "last wall in the world".
Commenting on a written statement issued by the Turkish Cypriot leader regarding a statement of President Papadopoulos and Greece's Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Costas Simitis and George Papandreou, who described the Green Line in Cyprus as "divisive wall", ORTAM writes that Mr Denktas said that the wall would continue to exist.
In his statement Mr Denktas alleged that if the policy of Turkey were expansionist, as the Greek Cypriot side declares, "southern Cyprus would have been Turkish a long time ago". Reiterating his allegations that the Green Line was drawn in 1963 to save the Turkish Cypriots from a genocide, Mr Denktas claimed that this line became stable as a result of Turkey's invasion in 1974.
The Turkish Cypriot leader argued that the existence of his pseudostate could not be ignored and concluded: "Everybody has understood this. When Papadopoulos understands it as well, our borders will become like the borders between the states of the EU. They will not be removed".
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
 Why is the Turkish army so resentful to the West?Under the above title, Turkish Daily News (03.06.03) publishes the following commentary by Cuneyt Ulsever.
The Turkish army used to be known as the vanguard of modernization in the country, and modernization only meant westernization for them.
I am 52 years old and my memory only tells me how vehemently the army pushed for westernization in the country, at least in the last 40 years. In fact, the army always looked down on Islamist components as the threat to the westernization target of the country. They always told us that Ataturk always reminded Turks that in order to reach contemporary civilization we must westernize.
Recently, there is a very strong anti-Western tone in nearly all declarations of the commanders. The anti-Western flavor became so clear that many intellectuals who backed the army in its previous struggle against the anti-Western groups in the country do not hide their anger towards the army now.
Except for a few pro-fascist views, nearly all columnists reacted to the recent so-called "globalization conference" organized by the General Staff last week.
One openly wrote: "Only those internationally known for anti-Western and anti-American ideas were invited."
The worries expressed by the commanders both against globalization in the conference and against the so-called "adaptation laws for the EU" were found groundless, unrealistic and meaningless by most people in the streets.
A professor who wrote me an e-mail said he is a Kemalist for sure but has difficulty in understanding the army recently.
He thought that the logic of the army is broken and there is no coherence amongst what different commanders say and, on top of that, there are flows within both the speeches of the Chief of Staff and his deputy.
According to the e-mail, the paradigm of the army has been challenged very strongly on two grounds recently by both internal and external forces.
The model in the mind of the General Staff is based on two components: We the Turks and our potential enemies.
Thus, the paradigm is: Enemies all around surround Turkey and it is the army which can protect the country against these global-technical, and thus unseen enemies. This paradigm is not convincing to the majority of the country at present. Because:
1) The Army's predictions based on their paradigm have all been proven to be wrong in the recent Iraqi war.
The U.S. began the war without using our land, did not lose the war, we were not involved in and they faced nearly no resistance, all contrary to the analyses they officially made.
2)These wrong predictions:
a) Wounded U.S.-Turkey relations deeply.
b) Humiliated the army before the eyes of the Turkish people.
3) In fact, the U.S. and more precisely the Pentagon were angry with the army more than anybody in Turkey because when the U.S. said, "Turkey is our best ally," she used to mean the army.
We Turks all know well that the supernatural power of the army in Turkish politics used to depend on the backing of the U.S.
4) The anti-American attitude of the army did not also win them even the most anti-American elements in Europe. Europe, like a chorus, is in line saying, "In order to become an EU member, you must minimize the role of the army in Turkish political and social life."
Thus "either the U.S. or EU" paradigm of the army also does not work.
The army is at present without a clear policy.
It has been clearly understood by many in the country who opposed that very idea before, that what the army meant by westernization was a Jacobean-westernization, in which every step towards the West could be controlled by them.