20
April 2005
2. "'Ignoring problems of human rights and restricting freedom of expression strengthen groups opposing the EU'", amidst rising tension in society, which may lead to further public outcries and unwarranted divisions among the public, Ayhan Bilgen, the chairman of Turkey's Association of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed Peoples (Mazlum-Der), stresses that Turkey is facing challenges both at home and abroad.
3. "New Pope's Views on Turkey/EU Stir Unease in Ankara", Turkish newspapers said on Wednesday that the new pope's opposition to Ankara joining the European Union could raise fresh obstacles to its membership.
4. "Europe Divides Turkey", Sabah columnist Asli Aydintasbas writes in her article titled ''Europe Divides Us'' in today's Sabah daily that the latest anti-EU stance of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in his speech at the Association of Independent Industrialists & Businessmen (MUSIAD) last week surprised everybody in Ankara.
5. "Military Must Vacate the Classrooms", scenes of violence and hate speech against the Kurds screeened as part of National Security course in a girls' high school in Izmir, sparks controversy.
6. "Local Kurdish Broadcast Requests Ignored", while national media disregards broadcasting in other languages than Turkish, Local Diyarbakir Gün TV is yet to receive a reply to begin Kurdish Arts and Culture programs since 15 months now.
7. "Hopeful signs for Turkey and Armenia", as Armenians gather worldwide this weekend to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the Armenian genocide, they are debating Turkish-Armenian reconciliation.
8. "EU-hopeful Turkey pressured by its past", amid international pressure to recognise the 1915 Armenian massacres as genocide, Turkey finds itself struggling between growing calls at home for the country to face the past and unease at giving in over a delicate issue it fears may cloud its bid to join the European Union.
1. - MHA - "The visitation of Öcalan has
been prevented for the 5th week":
BURSA / 20 April 2005 / translated by International Initiative
The lawyers of Kurdish People’s Leader Abdullah Öcalan were not permitted to go to Imrali for their routine weekly visitation on the grounds of ‘opposing weather’. One of his lawyers Mr. Irfan Dundar said that prevention of visitations are a violation of his defence rights especially at a time when re-trial is on the agenda.
The lawyers of Abdullah Öcalan, who is at the Imrali Special Closed Prison, Aysel Tugluk, Cabbar Leygara, Irfan Dundar and his brother Mehmet Öcalan arrived early this morning at the Gemlik Gendarmerie Commandership which is the passing point to the Imrali Island. The lawyers were not permitted to go to Imrali on the grounds of impermissible weather.
One of his lawyers, Mr. Irfan Dundar, showed reaction against the prevention of the visitation and underlined that the prevention meant the violation of his defence rights especially at a time when re-trial is on the agenda and continued; “In this situation our defence rights are being violated. Our inability to realise these visitations are shown to be either the boat or the opposing weather even under such normal weather conditions, this argument is not in accordance with the state’s seriousness. They are able to arrange their own transport in one way or another but do not give permission to us.”
Mr Irfan Dundar said neither the state nor Turkey have any advantages in such applications and pointed out; “The state, through such policies, is in a search for revenge of the possible re-trial decision of the ECHR. This situation is definitely outside the boundaries of law. The continuation of such policies, which create tension amongst the Kurdish people, harm social peace. Thus it must be corrected. It is a very sensitive point for the Kurdish people. Especially keeping in mind that everybody was in the wait as to what will happen this Wednesday, the sensitivity will increase due to prevention of the visitation this week as well. We call upon the state to act in accordance with the law and with responsibility. Because such an application is neither for the advantage of Turkey nor the state. Hence the visitations must be procured as soon as possible.
Dundar said that they made an application to the Bursa
Republic Attorney-General for the visitation to take place on Thursday
or Friday. He added that the Attorney-General said their requests will
be taken into consideration. 
2. - The New Anatolian - "'Ignoring problems of human rights and restricting freedom of expression strengthen groups opposing the EU'":
ANKARA / 20 April 2005 / by Burak Esen
Amidst rising tension in society, which may lead to further public outcries and unwarranted divisions among the public, Ayhan Bilgen, the chairman of Turkey's Association of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed Peoples (Mazlum-Der), stresses that Turkey is facing challenges both at home and abroad.
“Certain people in Europe say that Turkey doesn't deserve the European Union, while their counterparts in Turkey claim that the EU aims to split Turkey,” Bilgen said in an exclusive interview with The New Anatolian. "Turkey has taken the steps to come in line with EU standards far too quickly, and there's no longer an opportunity to make a u-turn; the government should do its best to persuade the public to digest the reforms."
“The state's duty is not only to guarantee the rights and freedoms of its citizens but also to protect people who use their rights against other members of the public. However, any statement on behalf of agitators by state officials increases tension in society.”
"Turkey has recently encountered major public outcries which may cause, certain people to dominate politics," he added. "The Turkish Republic previously experienced similar turmoil in the late 1970s when students and members of political groups took sides and to put a stop to the problems the army stepped in.
“Accusing anyone of provoking the public is not fair, but hesitation by state officials to investigate the issue make us think that certain authorities are involved in this. To decrease the tension the government should take steps to improve human rights. Human rights issues can't be ignored for the sake of EU membership. To ignore human rights problems and restrict the freedoms of Turkish people strengthens certain groups who are against the EU.
“If Turkey is driven into a demagogic political discourse, Turkish people will suffer. If the reforms are perceived as only having been carried out for the sake of EU membership, then the positive steps ensuring human rights and freedoms may cause the public to become more nationalistic, which would cloud the future of Turkey,” he warned.
Freedom of religion is a right for everyone
Bilgen interpreted the decision by European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in a headscarf trial that individuals in Turkey have to observe laws which are currently legal in a country as a double standard, which could also have political connotations.
In June last year the ECHR decided on behalf of Turkey that the state has the authority to impose certain restrictions to protect the secular and democratic structure of the country.
“The ECHR couldn't see a compromise in Turkish society on the headscarf issue. The decision disappointed both individuals in Turkey and Muslim minorities living in Europe. The freedom to wear a headscarf is up to the individual, and not related to a particular group or political movement in Turkey; moreover there's no ban on headscarves in Turkey.”
According to the Turkish dress code, headscarves aren't allowed to be worn in state offices and universities.
“No other authority can interfere in the headscarf issue except the Parliament; moreover, the government shouldn't enter into demagogic plans such as delaying the issue until the next presidential elections. Turkey needs an immediate solution which removes discrimination and double standards against women," stressed Bilgen.
Connected with the headscarf problem, Bilgen underlined the need for a solution to the issue of obligatory religion classes saying that the mission of the Directorate of Religious Affairs is to ensure equal representation for the whole country. “The state should give up control of religious matters. It should also change its attitude towards the official ideology which would help it to stop perceiving imaginary threats. These both restrict all areas of everybody's lives,” he said.
“The government has to take the risk of abolishing
institutions which pare dragging down Turkey. If politicians stand firm
and persuade every segment of society of their determination to solve
Turkey's problems, and the opposition parties don't try to conceal their
failure in elections by provoking certain authorities, politics would
runs like clockwork without any interference,” he concluded.
3. - Reuters - "New Pope's Views on Turkey/EU Stir Unease in Ankara":
ANKARA / 20 April 2005
Turkish newspapers said on Wednesday that the new pope's opposition to Ankara joining the European Union could raise fresh obstacles to its membership.
Joseph Ratzinger, elected pope on Tuesday, has said Muslim but secular Turkey should seek its future in an association of Islamic nations rather than the EU, which has Christian roots.
In an interview last year for France's Le Figaro Magazine, Ratzinger, then doctrinal head of the Roman Catholic Church, said Turkey had always been "in permanent contrast to Europe" and that linking it to Europe would be a mistake.
"The new pope is against Turkey," said the liberal daily Radikal in a headline.
The centrist Milliyet described Ratzinger as "one of the fathers of the concept for offering Turkey a privileged partnership" instead of EU membership.
German and French conservatives also favor "a privileged partnership" for Turkey falling well short of full membership. Ankara, which is due to start entry talks with the EU on Oct. 3, says it is interested only in membership.
"It would be bad news if Cardinal Ratzinger continues to hold his views as Pope Benedict XVI," said commentator Selcuk Gultasli in the pro-government Zaman daily.
"At a time of rising opposition against Turkey's EU membership in countries like France, Austria, Denmark and the Netherlands, the Vatican joining this opposition would send a wrong message not only to Turks but also to Muslims."
"Undoubtedly, the EU is a secular union ... but despite
this secularity the Vatican's influence should not be underestimated,"
he added.
4. - Turkish Press - "Europe Divides Turkey":
19 April 2005
Sabah columnist Asli Aydintasbas writes in her article titled ''Europe
Divides Us'' in today's Sabah daily that the latest anti-EU stance of
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in his speech at the Association
of Independent Industrialists & Businessmen (MUSIAD) last week surprised
everybody in Ankara.
''Erdogan showed the same stance against the EU during his trip to Norway, too,'' Aydintasbas said, adding that ''Erdogan spoke in a clearer way at the MUSIAD general assembly and stated that: It is true that there are many impositions from the EU. Sometimes we even face such attempts of the EU aiming to divide our country. We should stay strong and firm against such attempts as this is the only way to preclude adoption of negative policies against us.''
Aydintasbas comments in her article that nobody knows why the Premier assumed such a stance against the EU recently. She continues ''Europeans also try to understand what is going on. A European diplomat said that 'the recent remarks of Erdogan created and made bigger the question marks in our minds. What does your prime minister want?''
She says that Prime Minister Erdogan talks about division of the country and this constitutes a basic argument against the EU. ''If this is the case,'' Aydintasbas says ''then why should we want to join an organization that wants to divide us?'' she asks.
''There is another danger of the anti-EU discourse,'' she says comparing Turkey-EU relations to Turkey-US relations which were damaged in the same way.
''The state officials who had the opportunity to speak 'comfortably' against the US in front of the public opinion, later noticed that they had also encouraged anti-Americanism without being aware of that. But it had also been the responsibility of the same state officials to cope both with the negative impact of those statements on the Turkey-US relations and also with the escalating anti-Americanism in the Turkish public opinion,'' she says.
She ends her article commenting that ''wouldn't it be a pity to be drifted into a similar vicious circle with Europe when one takes into consideration the progress recorded in Turkey-EU relations so far?''
The same newspaper also published a news story titled
''EU Confused About Erdogan'', telling that European officials think
that the recent remarks of Erdogan who said that 'there were attempts
within the EU to divide Turkey' encouraged nationalism in Turkey. In
the story it is said that ''a high ranking official from the EU said
that the statements of Erdogan shocked Europe although EU gave the message
to Ankara that the Turkish government should calm the recent nationalist
flow in Turkey. The same official also stressed that Prime Minister
Erdogan acted on the contrary and disappointed EU.
5. - Bianet - "Military Must Vacate the Classrooms":
Scenes of violence and hate speech against the Kurds screeened as part of National Security course in a girls' high school in Izmir, sparks controversy. "This course provokes xenophobia and should be removed off the the curricula," experts agree.
ISTANBUL / 19 April 2005
Screening of a movie with scenes of violence and words of hatred directed at Kurds, as part of “National Security and Citizenship” course in a high school arouses concerns among teachers and parents in Izmir.
”This is militarizing civil life” says Adil Serim, local teachers union (Egitim-Sen ) branch leader.
Serim’s reaction is triggered by the screening of a film titled, “Why Turkey is Targeted?’ in the Alsancak Republican Vocational School for the Girls’.
In the film there were scenes of violence taking place in the Southeast of Turkey, generally inhabited by the Kurds, scene to two decades of armed clashes between the Turkish Army and the armed insurgent Kurdish group PKK.
Moreover, the film resorted to a propagandistic tone, with expressions like, in reference to the PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan “the baby killer”, and to the armed insurgents “those burning villages”.
According to pro-Kurdish daily Gündem a Mardin (a Southeastern city) born student, Y.A. complains that she is ousted by her friends after the film was screened.
Screening of the film follows eruption of events signaling the rise of nationalist tendencies around Turkey.
Few weeks ago, the destruction of a Turkish flag in Mersin during the Newroz celebrations caused a nation-wide roar. More recently, the nationalists attempted lynch left-wing activists in Trabzon and Sakarya.
National Security courses teach and preach politics
A recent research, “Human Rights in the Text Books Project” by the History Foundation shows that National Security courses comprise “militaristic education within the civil education system,” says Ayse Gul Altinay of Istanbul’s Sabanci University.
These courses have become transformed into political propaganda and preaching since the curricula changes in 1998, particularly in relation to such issues like the European Union and the relations with the Kurds.
According to findings of the project, the National Security courses and text books include a sizeable number of hate speech violating human rights. The three year project was conducted by the History Foundation in cooperation with the Academy of Sciences of Turkey.
The specialists have advised that the National Security courses are removed off the curricula to be replaced by “Peace” courses.
Courses are taught by soldiers
The National Security courses are taught since 1926. According
to regulations the courses are given by retired soldiers and the curricula
are prepared directly by the Office of the Chief of Staff.
6. - Bianet - "Local Kurdish Broadcast Requests Ignored":
While national media disregards broadcasting in other languages than Turkish, Local Diyarbakir Gün TV is yet to receive a reply to begin Kurdish Arts and Culture programs since 15 months now.
ISTANBUL / 19 April 2005
In spite of a series of amendments in the Turkish constitution and related laws, as part of the Turkey’s EU accession bid, what legalizes broadcasts “in mother tongues other than Turkish” changes are yet to take effect in daily life.
Even 15 months after the “Rules and Regulations Regarding in Languages and Dialects other than Turkish” is in force, local media still faces troubles in broadcasting in mother tongues prevalent in their regions.
The Radio and Television Supreme Board (RTÜK) who regulates the audio-visual media affairs in Turkey, is yet to authorize Diyarbakir local Gün TV for broadcasting an arts and Culture program called "Dergûsa Çandî" (Cradle of Culture) in the Kirmanji dialect of Kurdish.
Kirmanji is one of the two major Kurdish dialects, spoken mostly among the Kurds of Turkey while Sorani is more widespread in Iraq.
Gün TV had to apply twice for bureaucratic reasons, but they are yet to receive a reply for their application in January.
"We will file a case"
Cemal Dogan, the chief editor of the channel, says that they regard the delay with mounting suspicion and they will be filing a case if the authorization is further delayed.
They believe that positive steps were taken in the first six months as the rules and regulations were enforced, says Dogan. But they were disillusioned by the fact that the legal changes did not have much impact over daily life.
Broadcasting in mother tongues other than Turkish was legalized in 2004 when legal harmonization packages with the European Union were adopted by the parliament.
However, private national media institutions have not
paid much interest in broadcasting in languages other than Turkish.
On the other hand, the public channel TRT, broadcasts in selected mother
tongues since 7 June 2004. The Radio 1 and TV Channel 3 of the TRT broadcasts
in Bosnian, Arabic, Kirmanji, Circassian and Zaza in weeks days for
a short while. 
7. - The Boston Globe - "Hopeful signs for Turkey and Armenia":
NEW YORK / 20 April 2005 / by David L. Phillips
As Armenians gather worldwide this weekend to commemorate the 90th anniversary
of the Armenian genocide, they are debating Turkish-Armenian reconciliation.
The nationalist fringe believes there should be no contact between Turks
and Armenians until Turkey stops denying the genocide, pays reparations
and returns territory. Most Armenians support dialogue and cooperation.
They endorse opening the border in order to end Armenia's isolation
and impoverishment.
For 90 years, Turkish-Armenian relations have been defined by enmity and distrust. Misunderstandings are compounded by dramatically different versions of history. Armenians and most international historians describe pogroms in the late 19th century that killed a quarter of a million Armenians in eastern Anatolia. On April 24, 1915, some 800 Armenian community leaders were executed, and the deportation of Armenians resulted in the deaths of 1.5 million between 1915 and 1923.
The Turkish government emphasizes the war context in which events occurred. It points out that the deportation was in response to security concerns arising from the Armenian rebellion during which hundreds of thousands of Turks died. Turkey rejects use of the term genocide and resents efforts by Armenians to gain international recognition. Progress is further complicated by diaspora politics and the occupation of territories in Azerbaijan by Armenians.
In 2001, a heroic group of Turks and Armenians decided it was time to talk. They established the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission, which broke a taboo about Armenian issues in Turkey and spawned civil society projects involving business leaders, women's associations, youth groups and government officials.
This is not a substitute for official diplomacy. The goal is to explore the underlying conditions that gave rise to conflict and develop strategies. As a result, the conflict comes to be seen as a shared problem.
The commission's primary goal was to encourage Turkey and Armenia to open the Kars-Gyumri border gate as a first step toward establishing diplomatic relations. But the genocide issue cast a long shadow over discussions.
To address this problem, Turks and Armenians agreed to seek a nonbinding legal opinion facilitated by the well-respected International Center for Transitional Justice on the "applicability of the Genocide Convention to events in the early 20th century."
To the satisfaction of the Turks, the analysis concluded: "The Genocide Convention contains no provisions mandating its retroactive application. Therefore, no legal, financial or territorial claim arising out of the events could successfully be made against any individual or state under the Convention." This was important to Turks who believe that from the 1920 Sèvres Treaty to today, great powers misunderstand Turkey and seek to diminish their country.
The analysis also examined the events in the context of international law. To the satisfaction of Armenians, it concluded that one or more persons were killed; such persons belonged to a particular ethnic, racial or religious group; the action took place as part of a pattern of conduct against the group; and at least some of the Ottoman rulers knew that the deportation orders would result in many deaths. Therefore, their actions possessed the prerequisite genocidal intent.
Though the win-win analysis could be used by Turkey and Armenia to break the impasse, it is clear that Ankara is a long way from recognizing the genocide. Armenians are just as resolute in continuing their efforts to gain recognition.
At this juncture, Turkey and Armenia should broaden the discussion. The Armenian government can create conditions conducive to Turkey opening the border by reaffirming its commitment to the 1921 Kars Treaty, which demarcated the countries' modern-day boundary.
Turkish officials should recognize that Turkey has nothing to fear and lots to gain from opening the border. Normal travel and trade would have a huge economic impact on the provinces bordering Armenia while reducing the transportation cost of Turkish goods to Central Asia and beyond.
The United States can play an indispensable role. It should encourage Armenia to reach out and point out to Turkey that good neighborly relations would enhance its prospects of joining the European Union.
(David L. Phillips is a senior fellow and deputy director
of the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations
in New York. This article first appeared in The Boston Globe.)
8. - AFP - "EU-hopeful Turkey pressured by its past":
ANKARA / 20 April 2005
Amid international pressure to recognise the 1915 Armenian massacres as genocide, Turkey finds itself struggling between growing calls at home for the country to face the past and unease at giving in over a delicate issue it fears may cloud its bid to join the European Union.
In an unprecedented move, Turkish historians and intellectuals have increasingly started to question the official line on the once-taboo subject as Armenians prepare to mark the 90th anniversary of the killings.
"Turkey is going through a very important phase," Etyen Mahcupyan, a Turkish columnist of Armenian descent, told AFP. "Despite the state’s resistance, the people and the intellectual elite want officialdom to face the past and come up with a prudent policy."
Armenians say up to 1.5 million Armenians perished in orchestrated killings between 1915 and 1917 as the Ottoman Empire, the predecessor of modern Turkey, was falling apart.
Ankara argues that 300,000 Armenians and at least as many Turks died in what was civil strife during World War I when the Armenians rose against their Ottoman rulers and sided with invading Russian troops, resulting in an order to deport them en masse from their homelands.
But, in a challenge to the official line, award-winning Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk told a Swiss newspaper in February that "one million Armenians were killed in Turkey", which caused an uproar and resulted in a controversial order by the sub-governor of a small town for the author’s books to be destroyed.
Shortly afterwards, historian Halil Berktay openly told a leading Turkish newspaper that the Ottoman treatment of its Armenian subjects during World War I amounted to genocide, triggering angry letters from the paper’s readership.
In a bid to counter domestic and international pressure, state institutions have rushed out with documents they claim prove there was no genocide; the state archive over the weekend issued a list of more than 500,000 Turks it said were killed in systematic massacres by the Armenians.
"This is an attack by the state on its own society. The state fears society and imposes its view on them," Hrant Dink, editor of the Armenian-language weekly Agos, told AFP.
"But Turks are now saying the time has come to face the issue and if we want a solution, it can come only through internal dynamics and not through foreign pressure," Dink said.
Much to Ankara’s anger, the killings have already been acknowledged as genocide by a number of countries, including France, Canada and Switzerland.
Turkey now faces pressure from within the EU to address the genocide claims in what Ankara sees as a politically motivated campaign to hurt its membership bid as it prepares to begin accession talks with the bloc on October 3.
In a bid to blunt the Armenian campaign, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan last week suggested to Armenian President Robert Kocharian the creation of a joint commission to study the genocide allegations, saying Turkey has nothing to fear from its past.
But according to Mahcupyan, the real damage will come if Ankara insists on its refusal to re-evaluate the past.
"Every threat is an opportunity," he said. "If Turkey can catch up with and pursue what has already begun in society, it would increase its prestige and ensure good relations with the EU."
Reconciliation with the past could also help Turkey patch up ties with neighbouring Armenia, with whom it refuses to etablish diplomatic ties and open its borders, mainly because of the genocide claims.
Turkey also fears that acknowledging the massacres as genocide will lead to compensation claims from Armenians and some politicians have suggested that Yerevan may even claim territory from Ankara.
"Turkey would likely face compensation claims if
it acknowledged the genocide because Armenian properties were seized
by the Ottomans, but to even consider the possibility of territorial
claims is paranoid," Mahcupyan said.