Turkish Forum

Author: Aylin D. Miller

  • European Identity in a Multicultural Society

    European Identity in a Multicultural Society

    Food, drink, good company, and wise words …

    Dear Friends,

    Liberal Democrat Friends of Turkey is delighted to invite you to a pleasant evening with two excellent speakers; former Liberal Democrat Leader Charles Kennedy and Turkish Barrister Emma Edhem.

    As later this year the European elections we will be contested, we have chosen a European theme for the evening, “European Identity in a Multicultural Society”. People are sceptical of government, but in Scotland the Scottish identity was strong enough for people to vote for their own Parliament. Previously we saw ourselves as European and we voted in favour of joining the EU. But what do we think today? And what about the perceptions of ethnic minorities, many of whom think of themselves as British rather than English. And does that also include being European?

    Charles Kennedy is the former Liberal Democrat leader, president of the European Movement and Member of Parliament.

    Emma Edham is the president of the Turkish British Legal Society and Company Secretary of the Turkish British Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

    We are meeting at Shish (www.shish.com), one of our favourite restaurants conveniently located near Old Street tube in Central London.

    313-319 Old St, EC1V 9LE

    24 February 2009
    Time: 19:30 – 21:45

    The entry price of just £12 (£10 if on a low income) includes your food. Vegetarians will be well catered for.

    For further info contact: 07799142527, [email protected]

    We have great speakers and this will be a great event. Confirm your place now, before it’s too late!

    To book a place please reply with the following information:

    First name:
    Last name:
    E-mail:
    Phone:
    Zip code:
    Comments:

    Join Liberal Democrat Friends of Turkey on Facebook at:

  • Turkish leaders’ “brave” policy on Armenian issue

    Turkish leaders’ “brave” policy on Armenian issue

    Anatolia news agency, Ankara, in English 20:41 GMT 18 Feb 09

    Ankara, 18 February: A US congressman Robert Wexler, who is also the
    co-chair of Congressional Turkey-Caucasus Group, said on Wednesday [18
    February] that Turkey’s top officials’ brave policy on the Armenian
    issue was praiseworthy.


    (Wexler ıs jewısh amerıcan  and headıng turkısh amerıcan frıendshıp group ın US congress)


    Speaking to reporters after his talks with Turkish Prime Minister
    Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ankara, US Congressman Robert Wexler said that
    numerous issues concerning Turkey and USA were discussed during his
    bilateral meeting with Erdogan.

    Replying to a question on Turkish-Israeli relations, Wexler said
    improving the relations between Turkey and Israel was the best way to
    follow for both countries, adding that such an idea was expressed
    during his talks with Turkish President Abdullah Gul and Erdogan as
    well.

    Commenting on the Armenian issue, Wexler said that Turkey and Armenia
    had taken a step to start dialogue in a constructive way and he hoped
    such step would contribute to the normalization of relations between
    the two countries.

    Praising Gul and Erdogan’s efforts on the issue, Wexler said that the
    US Congress should also focus on the successful normalization of the
    relations between Turkey and Armenia.

    Copyright 2009 Anatolia News Agency

  • The Islamists Show Their Hand

    The Islamists Show Their Hand

    by Soner Cagaptay
    Newsweek, International Edition, Turkey
    Pg. 0 Vol. 153 No. 08 ISSN: 0163-7053

    When Turkey’s justice and development party (AKP) first took power in 2002, it tried to reassure moderates fearful it might chip away at the country’s secular, democratic and pro-Western values. The AKP renounced its Islamist heritage and began working instead to secure European Union membership and to turn Turkey into an even more liberal and pro-Western place. Almost seven years later, however, the AKP seems anything but reformist. The recent performance of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the party’s leader and Turkey’s prime minister, at Davos–where he stormed off a panel with Israeli President Shimon Peres, vowing never to return–has convinced many skeptics that the party is turning its back on the West. So have moves like saying he wants to represent Hamas on international platforms and defending Iran’s nuclear weapons. The AKP now sides with Islamists and ignores their crimes. This is radically different from the Turkey of old. What happened?

    To understand the AKP’s turnaround, remember where it came from. The party’s founders, including Erdogan, cut their teeth in an earlier, more explicitly Islamist party, which featured strong anti-Western, anti-Semitic and antisecular elements. The Welfare Party, as it was known, joined a coalition government in 1996 before alienating the secular Turkish military, the courts, and the West, leading it to be banned in 1998. Yet the party never truly disappeared, and Erdogan re-created it as the pro-American, pro-EU, capitalist and reformist AKP.

    Its transformation was a cynical one, however, and no sooner had the party gained power than it began to undermine the liberal values it supposedly stood for. In 2002, for instance, it began to hire top bureaucrats from an exclusive pool of religious conservatives, and the percentage of women in executive positions in government dropped.

    Efforts by secular institutions to curb the AKP only backfired. When the Constitutional Court tried to prevent it from appointing one of its own as president in 2007, the AKP cast itself as the underdog representative of Turkey’s poor Muslim masses and won a monumental election victory. This hastened the party’s return to its core values. The AKP began abandoning its displays of pluralism, dismissing dissent and ignoring checks and balances and condemned the media for daring to criticize it.

    The failure of EU accession talks also hurt. Having made a number of painful reforms in order to improve its chances of entry, in 2005 Turkey nonetheless hit stiff opposition led by France–at which point the AKP decided there was no point in making more painful and unpopular reforms. The nail in the coffin came that same year, when the European Court of Human Rights upheld Turkey’s old ban on Islamic headscarves on college campuses. The AKP had hoped Europe might help recalibrate Turkish secularism into a more tolerant form. But this wasn’t in the cards.

    Soon the AKP began abandoning its pro-Western foreign policies as well. Despite Ankara’s historic friendship with Washington, the United States is highly unpopular among the Turkish masses. Following the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the AKP realized it could use this anti-Americanism to bolster its own support. And when the Gaza operation began in December, it decided to add anti-Israeli language to the mix, which culminated at Davos, where Erdogan lectured Peres for his supposed crimes before flying home to an orchestrated hero’s welcome.

    Such behavior has fanned the flames of anti-Semitism in traditionally tolerant Turkey. Erdogan has blamed “the Jewish-influenced media for misrepresenting facts about Gaza,” and the AKP-run government of Istanbul has erected giant billboards across the city reading, “You cannot be the children of Moses.”

    Seven years after the AKP came to power, Turkey’s Islamists have returned to their roots. The AKP experience demonstrates that when Islamist parties moderate, it reflects not a strategic change but a tactical response to strong domestic and foreign opposition. Once these firewalls weaken, Islamist parties regress, driven by popular sentiment. A recent survey shows that the AKP’s popularity jumped 10 percent after the Davos incident, suggesting the party could pass the game-changing 50 percent threshold in the upcoming March 29 local elections. The AKP’s renewed Islamism may play well at the polls. But Turkey, and its allies, will be left worse off for it.

    Cagaptay is a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and author of “Islam, Secularism and Nationalism in Modern Turkey.”

    Copyright 2009 Newsweek

  • Turkey’s New Regional Role

    Turkey’s New Regional Role

    Two Calls, Many Scenarios: How Will Washington Readjust to Turkey’s New Regional Role?

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 33
    February 19, 2009
    By: Saban Kardas

    President Barack Obama telephoned President Abdullah Gul and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip separately on Monday. In his first official contact with the Turkish leaders since his inauguration, Obama discussed cooperation between the two countries over a wide spectrum of issues of common concern. Earlier this month, Vice President Joe Biden met Foreign Minister Ali Babacan at the security conference in Munich. Obama might have a face-to-face meeting with Gul during the NATO summit in April, celebrating the Atlantic alliance’s 60th anniversary.

    The statement released by the White House said “President Obama had warm and productive phone conversations with Turkish President Gul and Prime Minister Erdogan… The President emphasized the importance of the United States’ alliance with Turkey and said he looks forward to working with both President Gul and Prime Minister Erdogan on a broad agenda of mutual strategic interest.” Obama stressed the need to strengthen the U.S.-Turkish relationship and work together toward meeting the challenges of the 21st century (www.whitehouse.gov, February 16).

    The Turkish President’s office also issued a statement saying that “President Obama emphasized the importance he attaches to Turkish-U.S. relations and expressed his appreciation for [Turkey’s] leadership role in regional issues.” It was noted that the two sides had reiterated their determination to work together (www.tcbb.gov.tr, February 16).

    In its report, the Turkish Prime Minister’s office highlighted President Obama’s positive remarks about the Turkish-American strategic partnership and Turkey’s role for regional peace. The statement said that Erdogan had “expressed [to Obama] Turkey’s sensitivities in Armenia and the Middle East and emphasized the importance of a fair and impartial American attitude in order not to hurt bilateral relations [between Turkey and the United States].” The statement also quoted Obama as saying, “I would like to affirm the vital role played by your leadership in the Middle East peace process. America has always appreciated Turkey’s sensitivities” (www.bbm.gov.tr, January 16).

    Figuring out the reasons behind the timing of Obama’s calls has been a guessing game. Most observers focus on the issues raised during the talks as a key to understanding the content of the conversations and how Turkish-American relations may evolve in the days to come. According to official statements and various news stories, the issues discussed during both conversations included cooperation in NATO, U.S. support for Turkish-Iraqi rapprochement, the need for collaboration in Middle-East peace efforts, developments in Turkish-Armenian relations, Turkish-EU relations, and the United States’ policies toward Afghanistan and Pakistan.

    Statements from the Turkish leaders preferred to highlight Obama’s praise of Turkey’s strategic role, especially its policies in the Middle East. Following Turkey’s vocal criticism of Israel during the Gaza invasion, concerns had arisen about the future of Turkish-American relations. Pro-AKP media outlets maintained that Obama’s expression of U.S. readiness to cooperate with Turkey was a positive sign that tension between Turkey and Israel would not undermine Turkey’s place in the United States’ Middle East policies. They go so far as to claim that despite the urging by some pro-Israel lobbyists for Washington to punish Ankara for the Davos incident, the warm phone conversations show that Ankara has successfully managed to keep its relations with Tel Aviv and Washington in separate baskets (Yeni Safak, February 18).

    Other reports claimed that Obama solicited Turkey’s contributions for his administration’s plans for a new peace initiative in the Middle East. Furthermore, the Turkish side was reportedly assured by Obama that legislation recognizing the Armenian claims of genocide would not be brought before Congress (Radikal, February 17; Ihlas Haber Ajansi, February 17). According to a Turkish expert evaluating the phone conversations, it is unlikely that Obama will use the word “genocide” in his Armenian Remembrance Day statement on April 24 (Zaman, February 18). Erdogan said that he had had a detailed conversation with Obama about the Armenian claims, but he declined to give any details (Milliyet, February 19).

    Turkish media outlets critical of the government, however, noted that the White House statement had departed from the issues highlighted by Ankara, instead putting emphasis on Turkey’s NATO membership and changes in the U.S. policies toward Pakistan and Afghanistan. They also pointed out that Obama’s office did not even mention the Armenian issue in the list of topics being discussed. According to these sources, some Washington-based analysts maintain that the reference to NATO was meant to remind Turkey of its responsibilities under the Atlantic alliance and warn Ankara about its “independent initiatives” (www.cnnturk.com, February 17; Cumhuriyet, February 17).

    Indeed, Turkey has opted to develop special missions for itself outside the alliance framework—its role as peace broker in the Middle East, for example—and has occasionally deviated from the transatlantic community on issues such as how to deal with Russia, Sudan, and Iran. In Ankara’s view, this new activism could be complementary to Western efforts to promote peace and stability in troubled regions; but according to critics of the government, Turkey’s attempts to carve an autonomous international profile might strain Turkish-American relations.

    Many Turkish analysts also agree that the mention of Afghanistan by the White House was significant in light of Washington’s recently announced plans to bolster U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan. About 800 Turkish troops are currently serving in Afghanistan under the NATO-led International Security and Assistance Force (ISAF), and Turkey has held the ISAF command for two terms in the past. Given the difficulties NATO has encountered in carrying out its mission in Afghanistan and the Obama administration’s determination to refocus its attention there, Ankara, along with other NATO allies, might be coming under pressure to increase its contributions to the ISAF and remove the obstacles it sets to EU-NATO coordination (Today’s Zaman, February 18, Hurriyet Daily News, February 18; EDM, February 9). When this issue was brought up in the past, Turkey declined to commit additional troops, but it remains to be seen how Ankara will respond to such requests in the run-up to the NATO Summit in April.

    Discussions following Obama’s two telephone calls show that Turkish-American relations in the Obama administration are still in uncharted waters. By calling Gul and Erdogan separately, Obama showed that he was aware of who wielded power in Ankara; but how Washington will readjust itself to Ankara’s more assertive role in regional politics is a question that still begs for an answer. Developments ahead of the NATO summit and Obama’s handling of the Armenian claims will give more concrete indications of whether and how the parties will find common ground beyond rhetoric.

    https://jamestown.org/program/two-calls-many-scenarios-how-will-washington-readjust-to-turkeys-new-regional-role/

  • Complaint Against ANCA

    Complaint Against ANCA

    Ethics group asks for federal investigation of Armenian organization
    Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2009
    By Michael Doyle / Bee Washington Bureau

    WASHINGTON – A high-profile ethics organization on Wednesday asked federal agencies to investigate the Armenian National Committee of America for alleged campaign finance and lobbying violations.

    In a seven-page complaint, the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington asserts the Armenian-American group failed to register either as a domestic lobbying group or as a foreign agent despite its political work and its close ties to an Armenian political party.

    The Armenian National Committee of America is one of the country’s most prominent ethnic organizations, and has worked closely with San Joaquin Valley lawmakers on Armenian genocide commemorative resolutions.

    “We’re not saying they should be out of business,” said Melanie Sloan, a former federal prosecutor who heads the private Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. “We’re saying there are laws, and they should be following them.”

    Sloan attached 161 pages of exhibits in support of the allegations.

    Armenian National Committee of America officials denounced the charges as unfounded.

    “We’ve taken a preliminary look at [the] allegations, and they are without merit and full of inaccuracies and misrepresentations,” ANCA Communications Director Elizabeth Chouldjian said.

    Chouldjian declined to undertake a point-by-point rebuttal of the complaint, but she said “the real story is why this is being brought up now.” She noted the complaint was filed about two months before the annual April 24 Armenian genocide commemoration; she did not elaborate on a potential motive for the complaint’s timing.

    The Armenian National Committee of America describes itself on its web site as “the largest and most influential Armenian American grassroots political organization.” It is active in regions with large Armenian-American populations, including New Jersey, Florida and California.

    Currently, Rep. George Radanovich, R-Mariposa, and other ANCA allies are rallying renewed support for an Armenian genocide resolution that collapsed last Congress. Under presidents of both parties, the Pentagon and State Department have opposed the resolution as an insult to Turkey, which denies that mass deaths between 1915 and 1923 amounted to a genocide.

    “Circumstantial evidence indicates that ANCA and its current or former executive directors … have lobbied Congress and the executive branch heavily with regard to perennial congressional Armenian genocide resolutions,” the complaint states.

    The complaint cites interviews and press releases, in which ANCA leaders tout their efforts to sway Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., among others.

    The Armenian National Committee of America has not registered as a lobbyist with either the House or Senate. Failure to register can be a felony offense, though Sloan said potential problems are often resolved simply by registering after the fact.

    The Armenian Assembly of America, the nation’s other prominent Armenian-American organization, is registered and reported spending $182,000 on lobbying last year.

    “These are the rules, and everybody has to follow them,” Sloan said.

    The complaint asks the Internal Revenue Service to review potential tax violations and the Justice Department to open a criminal probe. The complaint also asks the House and Senate to open “companion inquiries” into the lobbying allegations.

    Citing press accounts, a U.S. embassy study and the research of Heather Gregg, a professor at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, the complaint contends ANCA is “an arm” of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. The latter is a political party that is part of Armenia’s ruling coalition.

    Agents of foreign political parties are required to register with the Justice Department. ANCA can endorse political candidates, as a group organized under section 501 (c)(4) of the federal tax code. The affiliated ANCA-Western Region, based in Glendale, cannot because it is a 501 (c)(3) organization. The complaint alleges the Western Region office nonetheless participated in the national organization’s candidate endorsements, in part by sharing a Web site.

    Sloan said the complaint arose from a tip received late last year.

    Sloan’s non-profit, six-year-old ethics group claims no partisan affiliation and has previously filed ethics complaints about both Democratic and Republican lawmakers. Its past targets have ranged from former Tracy area GOP congressman Richard Pombo to former Vice President Dick Cheney.

  • Poor Richard’s Report

    Poor Richard’s Report

    Israel: Apology Issued To Turkish General
    February 19, 2009Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi issued an apology to his Turkish counterpart for critical comments made by an IDF commander about Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, The Jerusalem Post reported Feb. 19. IDF Maj. Gen. Avi Mizrachi said in a lecture the week of Feb. 8 that Erdogan, who has criticized Israel’s Operation Cast Lead offensive in the Gaza Strip, should first look in the mirror. Ashkenazi told Turkish Gen. Ilker Basburg that Mizrachi’s comment was not the IDF’s official position, and that Israel valued its strategic relationship with Turkey.

    Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
    © Copyright 2009 Stratfor. All rights reserved.