The Washington Times Prints AHI Letter to Editor on Op-Ed "Turkey's EU Accession"
Washington, DC- On November 24, 2006, The Washington Times published AHI Executive Director Nick Larigakis' letter to the editor, on page A22, responding to The Washington Times Op-Ed "Turkey's EU Accession." The text of the letter appears below, followed by The Washington Times article to which the letter responds.
November 17, 2006
Letters to the Editor
The Washington Times
3600 New York Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20002
Dear Editor:
The Washington Times Op-Ed "Turkey's EU accession." (11-14-06) criticizes the European Commission's "Turkey 2006 Progress Report" released November 8, 2006 because of what it includes regarding Cyprus. The article fails to point out that Turkey willingly signed an EU Protocol in July of 2005 of which she ".has not fully implemented."according to the polite language within the report.
For the benefit of the readers,
the report was 78 pages of which only a little over a page dealt with
Cyprus. The article is trying to use Cyprus as a scapegoat for the
tone of the report when in fact the report presents a balanced but
negative review of the progress made in Turkey on all 33 chapters.
In the final analysis, while Cyprus is an important matter to address for
Turkey, the problems facing the accession talks are serious and deep.
The burden is on Turkey and not on the EU. Turkey needs to reform,
to implement these reforms, address bilateral and domestic issues, and
meet all contractual obligations if the accession talks are to move
forward.
Finally, for the record, Turkey's illegal invasion of 7/20/1974, and continuing occupation of over 37% of Cyprus, has not been accepted by the international community as ".intervening in Cyprus in 1974 to liberate Turkish Cypriots." Turkish Cypriots were never held hostage by the Greek Cypriots. The invasion was condemned by the international community as it, in addition to violating U.S. law under the U.S. Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, violated the UN Charter, art. 2 (4), the NATO treaty and customary international law. On 8/14/1974, three weeks after the legitimate government of Cyprus was restored, Turkey launched the second phase of its invasion of Cyprus grabbing another 33% of the island, thus expanding its land grab to 37.3%.
This prompted the United Nations to pass a unanimous General Assembly Resolution (UNGA Res. 3212) on November 1, 1974, endorsed by the Security Council on 12/13/74, urging "the speedy withdrawal of all foreign armed forces and foreign military presence and personnel from the Republic of Cyprus and the cessation of all foreign interference in its affairs;" and called "upon all states to respect the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity" of Cyprus. To this day Turkish military forces continue to occupy Cyprus, an EU country.
Nick Larigakis
Executive Director
American Hellenic Institute
Turkey's
EU accession
By Tulin Daloglu
November 14, 2006
Two things happened last week that are crucial to understanding the
realities of the new world order shaping up in
and around Turkey.
First, the European Commission's much-anticipated annual Turkey report was
made public, stating that unless Turkey fully
recognizes Greek Cyprus in less
than two months, accession talks will come to a
hold. With this final push on
Cyprus, Europeans should be expecting Turkey to
voluntarily withdraw its pursuit
of EU membership.
Second, Bulent Ecevit, Turkey's five-term premier, passed away. He was
best
known for intervening in Cyprus in 1974 to
liberate Turkish Cypriots and for
asking for a five-year freeze on Turkey's
commitments with the then-European
Economic Community in 1978.
The freezing of commitments is important when added to the tens of
thousands
of people who attended Mr. Ecevit's funeral on
Saturday. As they sent the
"Cyprus hero" to his final
destination, the message of the people was clear:
Turks will not abandon the Turkish Cypriots. The
latest Eurobarometer poll shows
that just 35 percent of Turks say they trust the
European Union -- down from
nearly 80 percent two years ago. It doesn't take
an Einstein to figure out the
impact of Cyprus on that number. The crowd at
Mr. Ecevit's funeral chanted
"Turkey is secular; will remain
secular" -- implying that the Islamist
government's majority in the Turkish parliament
will end with the next national
election.
It's one thing for secular Turks to be suspicious of Islamist leader Recep
Tayip Erdogan's intentions about the future of
the regime, but no one can claim
he is willing to give up Cyprus to join the EU.
So it is just a matter of time
before the EU starts freezing certain chapters
of the accession negotiations
with Turkey, which means Turkey's aspirations
will be in crisis mode by the New
Year.
Crisis is also a time -- if well used -- to open new opportunities. I've
professionally supported Turkey's EU drive for
over a decade. I say no more, not
with this treatment any longer.
First, Turks should not feel hopeless when the long engagement period with
the EU ends without a marriage. The present time
shows it is in fact to Turkey's
benefit not to push to join. It should not,
however, be the party to withdraw
from negotiations. After all, the EU has no
recourse when Turkey continues to
refuse to recognize Greek Cyprus. Who with any
common sense could assume that
the EU will impose economic sanctions or launch
a military operation against
Turkey over this issue? European leadership
decided to keep Turkey on the hook,
but not with the aim of making it an equal
partner in the EU. Their decision
should be heard and respected.
Turkey does not necessarily have to loudly announce its new aspirations.
But
one thing is clear: There is an emerging
strength in Turkish democracy. As more
and more people align themselves with democratic
principles, it becomes
impossible for Ataturk's Turkey to turn into a
dictatorship or an Islamist
state. The regional dynamics make it vital for
Turkey to increase its
cooperation with the Muslim Middle East. The
environment may make its Muslim
identity even more important. It should,
however, be well known that there is no
chance for Wahabi radical ideology to find a
"permanent" base on the Anatolian
land. Unfortunately, it is possible that those
radicals may reap the benefit of
the environmental and emotional storm while
accepting that EU no more.
In the meantime, the Turkish leadership should focus on policies that will
keep the economic growth sustainable. If Russia
is a giant producer of gas,
Turkey should be the country in the region that
is the major conveyor and
transporter of energy. After all, politics is
not about fairness. In a world of
power politics, Russia is doing nothing wrong
when it charges different
countries different prices for gas. A possible
strengthened cooperation with
Russia, however, has the potential to force
Europe to start taking Turkey
seriously.
Turks should also start using this time efficiently in redefining their
identity. Currently, Europeans respect the
Iranian regime more than the secular
Turkish government.
It should also be made clear that when the Turkish parliament decided not
to
ally with the United States to invade Iraq, it
was not an approval of a
dictatorship or human rights abuses. Turkey
cannot be held responsible for the
state of affairs in Iraq today. In the same
manner, Turkey's strengthened
relationship with Russia should not be
interpreted as a move against democracy
in the trans-Caspian region.
Turkey should extend its aspirations to China to create new business
opportunities for its growing economy. It should
draw inspiration from Japan, a
country that kept its culture and traditions
while building a strong high-tech
industry.
Finally, there should be no doubt that this new Turkey will continue to be
a
strong ally of the United States in the region,
helping to bring security and
stability to Iraq, trying to positively impact
the Iranian regime's ideology and
continuing to inspire Muslims in the broader
region to accept that democracy is
the answer while coping with crisis.
Tulin Daloglu is a Turkish free-lance writer.
