Turkish Forum

Month: October 2008

  • EU agrees “Blue Card” to lure high skilled migrants

    EU agrees “Blue Card” to lure high skilled migrants

    Wed 22 Oct 2008, 8:43 GMT

    (adds details, analyst, link to factbox)

    By Ingrid Melander

    BRUSSELS, Oct 22 (Reuters) – European Union envoys agreed on Wednesday on a fast-track “Blue Card” scheme to attract high skilled migrant workers from developing countries in a bid to compete with the U.S. Green Card, the French EU Presidency said.

    The Blue Card, valid for a maximum of four years, will offer candidates speedier work permits and make it easier for migrants’ families to join them, find public housing and acquire long-term resident status.

    It aims to make the bloc more competitive in a battle with the United States and other ageing Western societies for coveted technology workers and hospital staff from the developing world, increasingly needed to plug labour gaps.

    Highly-skilled foreign workers make up 1.7 percent of migrant workers in the EU, compared with 9.9 percent of migrants to Australia, 7.3 percent to Canada and 3.2 percent to the United States, EU data show.

    Analysts say the Blue Card scheme will not be enough to lure top-end staff and compete with the U.S. Green Card because it offers access to only one EU state at a time, not free mobility within the European single market.

    After 18 months of working with a Blue Card in one EU state, an immigrant would be allowed to move with his family to work in another EU state, but he or she would still have to apply for a new Blue Card there within a month of arrival.

    This provision was required by countries which are determined to maintain national sovereignty over their labour market, such as Germany.

    NATIONAL QUOTAS

    The fact that a Blue Card is not automatically valid for the whole of the EU takes away most of the advantage of having an EU-wide scheme because it gives access to a much smaller market and fewer opportunities, says Jakob von Weizsaecker, from the Brussels-based Bruegel economic policy think-tank.

    “It is clearly a step in the right direction but I don’t expect it to be a big success because if you compare it to the United States, a similar title gives access to the whole U.S. market,” the German labour-market specialist said.

    The Blue Card will be issued to highly skilled workers who have obtained a contract paying a gross annual salary of at least 1.5 times the average wage in the EU state concerned. The figure can fall to 1.2 times average salary in sectors with big labour shortages.

    Governments may refuse to issue Blue Cards citing labour market problems or if national quotas are exceeded.

    The new scheme enters into force 30 months after EU ministers endorse it in the coming weeks, an EU official said.

    The delay was required by new member states such as the Czech Republic, who insisted existing curbs on their citizens’ working freely throughout the bloc be lifted first.

    For a related Factbox click on: [LP656113]

    (Reporting by Ingrid Melander; Editing by Paul Taylor and Richard Balmforth)

    Source: africa.reuters.com, 22 Oct 2008

  • President’s dilemma

    President’s dilemma

    Oct 23rd 2008
    From Economist.com

    Deciding between Nabucco and South Stream

    WHICH will it be? The next American president will have to decide.
    Either Europe gets natural gas from Iran, or Russia stitches up the
    continent’s energy supplies for a generation.

    In one sense, it is hard to compare the two problems. Iranian nuclear
    missiles would be an existential threat to Israel. If Russia sells it
    rocket systems and warhead technology, or advanced air-defence systems
    (or vetoes sanctions) it matters. By contrast, Russia’s threat to
    European security is a slow, boring business. At worst, Europe ends up
    a bit more beholden to Russian pipeline monopolists than is healthy
    politically. But life will go on.

    Europe’s energy hopes lie in a much discussed but so far unrealised
    independent pipeline. Nabucco, as it is optimistically titled (as in
    Verdi, and freeing the slaves) would take gas from Central Asia and
    the Caspian region via Turkey to the Balkans and Central Europe. That
    would replicate the success of two existing oil pipelines across
    Georgia, which have helped dent Russia’s grip on east-west export routes.

    Russia is trying hard to block this. It is reviving the idea of an
    international gas cartel with Qatar and Iran. It also wants to kybosh
    Nabucco through its own rival project, the hugely expensive ($12.8
    billion) South Stream. Backed by Gazprom (the gas division of Kremlin,
    Inc) and Italy’s ENI, it has already got support from Austria,
    Bulgaria and Serbia. The project has now been delayed two years to 2015.

    But politicking around it is lively. This week the Kremlin managed to
    get Romania—until now a determined holdout on the Nabucco side—to
    start talks on joining South Stream. As Vladimir Socor, a veteran
    analyst at the Jamestown Foundation, notes, that creates just the kind
    of contest that the Kremlin likes, in which European countries jostle
    each other to get the best deal from Russia. Previously, that played
    out in a central European battle between Austria and Hungary to be
    Russia’s most-favoured energy partner in the region. Now the Kremlin
    has brought in Slovenia to further increase its leverage.

    All this works only because the European Union (EU) is asleep on the
    job. Bizarrely, Europe’s leaders publicly maintain that the two
    pipelines are not competitors. They have given the task of promoting
    Nabucco to a retired Dutch politician who has not visited the most
    important countries in the project recently (or in some cases even at
    all).

    The main reason for the lack of private-sector interest is lack of
    gas. The big reserves are in Turkmenistan, but Russia wants them too.
    Securing them for Nabucco would mean a huge, concerted diplomatic push
    from the EU and from America. It would also require the building of a
    Transcaspian gas pipeline.

    That is not technically difficult (unlike, incidentally, South Stream,
    which goes through the deep, toxic and rocky depths of the Black Sea).
    But it faces legal obstacles, and could be vetoed by both Russia and
    Iran. As Zeyno Baran of the Hudson Institute argues in a new paper,
    “the fortunes of the two pipelines are inversely related”.

    That is America’s dilemma. Befriending Iran would create huge problems
    for Russia. An Iranian bypass round the Caspian allows Turkmen gas
    (and Iran’s own plentiful reserves) to flow to Turkey and then on to
    Europe. But the same American officials, politicians and analysts who
    are most hawkish about Russia tend also to be arch-sceptics about
    starting talks with the mullahs (or even turning a blind eye to
    Iranian gas flowing through an American-backed pipeline).

    If Iran can make it clear that does not want to destroy Israel and
    promote terrorism (and stops issuing rhetorical flourishes on the
    subject) it stands to benefit hugely. The “grand bargain” has never
    looked more tempting—or more urgent.

  • Aliev Again Rules Out Independence For Karabakh

    Aliev Again Rules Out Independence For Karabakh

     

     

     

     

     

    By Emil Danielyan

    Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliev reiterated that his country will never come to terms with the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh but stopped short of threatening to win back the region by force as he was sworn in for a second term in office on Friday.

    “Karabakh will never be independent,” news agencies quoted him as saying during his inauguration ceremony in Baku. “Azerbaijan will never recognize it. Neither in five, nor in ten, twenty years. Never.”

    Aliev said Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity is not the subject of long-running Armenian-Azerbaijani peace talks which have made considerable progress in recent years. But he did not mention details of the U.S., Russian and French mediators’ existing peace proposals that seem to uphold the Karabakh Armenians’ right to legitimize the dispute territory’s de facto secession from Azerbaijan in a future referendum.

    The three co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group hope that Aliev and his Armenian counterpart Serzh Sarkisian will meet soon and finally accept those proposals. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev publicly offered to host the meeting as he visited Yerevan earlier this week. Medvedev reportedly discussed the matter with Aliev by phone on his return to Moscow. No dates have been set yet for the potentially decisive Armenian-Azerbaijani summit, though.

    “We are still interested in the continuation of negotiations and our hopes have not faded yet,” said Aliev. “We still believe that the negotiations may lead to a just settlement.

    “The opposite side must come to terms with reality. And the reality is that today it is difficult and, I would say, impossible to compete with Azerbaijan.”

    But while pledging to further boost military spending and the strengthen the Azerbaijani army, Aliev voiced no direct threats to resolve the Karabakh dispute by force if the Minsk Group process fails. He said instead that Azerbaijan will regain control over Karabakh by capitalizing on its “economic might” and international law.

    Aliev regularly threatened the Armenians with war before the recent military conflict between Georgia and Russia. Armenian leaders claim that Georgia’s disastrous attempt to retake South Ossetia will discourage Baku from trying the military option in the foreseeable future. A senior U.S. official likewise said last week that the likelihood of renewed fighting around Karabakh has decreased since the Russian-Georgian war.

  • Russia Proposes Hosting Karabakh Summit

    Russia Proposes Hosting Karabakh Summit

    Russian President Dmitry Medvedev will host a summit on Nagorno-Karabakh next month

    October 22, 2008
    By Liz Fuller

     

    The brief August war between Georgia and Russia served to highlight the destabilizing potential of unresolved conflicts in the Caucasus and thus lent a new urgency to ongoing efforts to find a solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

    Speaking on October 21 during a visit to Yerevan, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev argued that one of the lessons to be drawn from the fighting over South Ossetia is that such conflicts can and must be resolved peacefully, through negotiations.

    To that end, Medvedev offered to host a summit in Moscow early next month between Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian and his newly reelected Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliyev in order to seek a solution to the Karabakh conflict “based on international principles.”

    Basic Principles

    The September visit to Yerevan by Turkish President Abdullah Gul fuelled hopes for a normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia that could in turn facilitate an accord on Karabakh. At the same time, some analysts construed Gul’s statement that Ankara is ready to help mediate such a solution as a bid, possibly supported by Russia, to sideline the OSCE’s Minsk Group. And some political figures in Yerevan fear that under pressure from both Russia and the West, Sarkisian might agree to compromises they consider unacceptable and detrimental to Armenia’s long-term interests.

    A framework agreement for resolving the Karabakh conflict already exists, in the form of the so-called Madrid Principles presented by the French, U.S., and Russian Minsk Group co-chairmen to the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan in Madrid in November 2007. That blueprint in turn was based on the so-called Basic Principles for the Peaceful Solution of the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict, which were made public in June 2006.

    The Basic Principles envisage the phased withdrawal of Armenian forces from Azerbaijani territories contiguous to Nagorno-Karabakh, including the district of Kelbacar and the strategic Lachin corridor that links Armenia and the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR); the demilitarization of those previously occupied territories; the deployment of an international peacekeeping force; demining, reconstruction, and other measures to address the impact of the conflict and expedite the return to their homes of displaced persons; and, finally, a referendum among the NKR population to determine the region’s future status vis-a-vis the central Azerbaijani government in Baku.

    Meeting for the first time on the sidelines of a CIS summit in St. Petersburg in June, Sarkisian and Aliyev gave the green light for their respective foreign ministers to continue talks on ways to resolve the conflict on the basis of the Madrid Principles. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who traveled to Yerevan in early October for talks with Sarkisian and Armenian Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian, was quoted by “Rossiiskaya gazeta” on October 7 as saying that all three co-chairs see “a very real chance” of resolving the conflict, assuming that agreement can be reached on the “two or three” still unresolved issues.

    Lavrov added that the main obstacle is lack of consensus on the future of the Lachin corridor. The Azerbaijani website day.az back on April 1 quoted Azerbaijani Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov as saying Azerbaijan has no objections to both Armenia and Azerbaijan using the corridor, provided it remains territorially a part of Azerbaijan.

    Resolution Hopes

    Visiting Yerevan on October 17, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried was even more upbeat than Lavrov. He told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service that a breakthrough in the conflict-resolution process in the coming weeks is “possible,” given that “the war in Georgia reminded everyone in this region how terrible war is” and thus made a resumption of hostilities less likely. But, Fried went on, “possible does not mean inevitable, and there are hard decisions that have to be made on both sides. If this conflict were easy to resolve, it would have been resolved already.”

    Fried did not mention any heightened role for Turkey in the peace process. But meeting with Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian (no relation to Serzh) in Washington on October 14, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice discounted speculation that the Minsk Group would be superseded as the mediating body.

    Speaking to journalists in Yerevan on September 17, French Minsk Group co-Chairman Bernard Fassier similarly sought to dispel the perception that Turkey was seeking to torpedo the work of the Minsk Group. Fassier explained that since Turkey is one of the 12 members of the OSCE Minsk Group, “its efforts directed at providing assistance to the settlement of the Karabakh conflict do not imply a change in the format of negotiations.” He said that Turkey “has always shown a constructive approach, supporting the activities of the three co-chairmen,” and that “any proposal made to support the negotiations, in particular from Turkey, is desirable and welcome,” RFE/RL’s Armenian Service reported.

    (Click map to enlarge)

    Former Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrossian nonetheless argued at a rally of his supporters in Yerevan on October 17 that the West is trying to squeeze Russia out of the Karabakh peace process as part of a broader effort to minimize Russian influence in the South Caucasus, RFE/RL’s Armenian Service reported.

    Ter-Petrossian accused President Sarkisian (after whom, according to official returns, he polled second in the February 19 presidential ballot) of being ready to “put Karabakh up for sale” and renounce Armenia’s long-standing political and military alliance with Russia in an effort to legitimize his rule in the eyes of the international community. By doing so, Ter-Petrossian continued, Sarkisian is in effect entrusting the West in general, and Turkey in particular, with achieving a “unilateral settlement” of the Karabakh conflict.

    Even the Armenian Revolutionary Federation-Dashnaktsutiun (HHD), a member of the four-party coalition government, is uneasy at the prospect that, under pressure from the international community, President Sarkisian might make unacceptable concessions over Karabakh. HHD parliament faction secretary Artashes Shahbazian told journalists in Yerevan on October 13 that his party, and Armenian society as a whole, opposes the return to Azerbaijan of the districts currently under the control of Armenian forces, Noyan Tapan reported.

    Asked on October 20 why the HHD remains in government if it rejects President Sarkisian’s Karabakh policy, senior HHD member Kiro Manoyan explained that “it is the chance to convince our partners and influence them that keeps us in the coalition,” Noyan Tapan reported. Manoyan added that if the HHD concludes that it no longer wields any influence, it will quit the coalition.

  • WATCHING A GAME BY MUMTAZ SOYSAL (CUMHURIYET)

    WATCHING A GAME BY MUMTAZ SOYSAL (CUMHURIYET)

    Columnist Turker Alkan comments on the US presidential elections and Turkish-US relations. A summary of his column is as follows:
    “Watching another country’s elections isn’t like watching a soccer game. You have to think about how the candidates would treat your country. And if the country in question is the US, which is both near and far from Turkey and has a large impact on us, you would certainly watch those elections differently.

    At the same time, there will always be certain factors which might change the usual preferences for your country’s interests. We seem to be facing this situation now in terms of the US elections set for Nov. 4. Our leaders and many people interested in foreign policy favor the incumbent Republicans, who are more conservative than the Democrats. Why? Because they think that American liberals are more interested in human and minority rights and could disappoint Turkey by, for example, supporting the Greek Cypriots and Armenians on such issues as Cyprus or the so-called Armenian genocide.

    But even in this situation, certain factors might change the usual preferences. The Iraq policies followed by the Bushes, both father and son, as Republican presidents hurt Turks’ views of Americans in general, not just certain politicians, and damaged our positive feelings for the US and its people. Yet perhaps the enthusiasm stirred by Barack Obama, the Democrats’ candidate, among both the US people and young Turks could help dispel the bad feelings over the Bushes and so warm up Turkish-US relations.

    But an official Obama statement this week referring to the ‘Turkish occupation of northern Cyprus,’ as well as the campaign’s stance on the so-called Armenian genocide, also play a role. So while many university students in Turkey share their US counterparts’ enthusiasm over Obama, the same cannot be said of political circles. So if politicians who are campaigning for votes far away ignore Turkey, shouldn’t we remind them that that doing so carries a high price?”

  • Rothschild and the daughter of one of the world’s most brutal dictators

    Rothschild and the daughter of one of the world’s most brutal dictators

    By Daily Mail Reporter

    Last updated at 12:26 AM on 25th October 2008

    He is used to having glamorous women on his arm, but this picture of controversial financier Nathaniel Rothschild will raise some eyebrows.

    His companion is Gulnara Karimova, billionaire daughter of one of the world’s most brutal and bloodthirsty dictators, President Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan.

    Like his friend, Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska, she has had problems with the American authorities.

    Controversial: Nat Rothschild pictured with Gulnara Karimova, the daughter of Uzbekistan President Islam Karimov

    Deripaska is refused a U.S. visa for reasons the FBI has not fully explained.

    Gulnara, a 36-year-old Harvard graduate, was made the subject of an arrest warrant after she defied a court and took her two children by a U.S. man of Uzbek origin back to her homeland.

    The picture was taken in March 2007 at an Uzbek fashion show in Paris, intended to improve the country’s reputation after a massacre two years earlier ordered by Karimov in which hundreds or even thousands perished.

    Gulnara is a martial-arts black belt, fashion designer, poet and performer of a number one hit single in her homeland.

    Craig Murray, former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, said: ‘This woman is not just the daughter of one of the most violent tyrants on Earth, she is also directly implicated in atrocities and the major beneficiary of the looting of the Uzbek state.

    ‘I am stunned that Rothschild would want to pose with her.’

    Source: www.dailymail.co.uk, 25th October 2008