Turkey's first Kurdish dept opens amid political tension

From Hürriyet Daily News:

The beginning of Turkey's first undergraduate Kurdish program has been welcomed but the development comes amid charter-related tension

After years of efforts, a number of rejections and strong debates, Turkey’s first undergraduate-level Kurdish language and literature department is welcoming students for its first class today in the southeastern province Mardin’s Artuklu University.

The beginning of the first undergraduate-level Kurdish program, which many consider a positive development, comes at a time of recent tension over discussions on Turkey’s new constitution, which are about to commence between the ruling and oppositional parties, including the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP), which is primarily focused on the Kurdish issue.

While tension among the delegates is expected to rise especially on the first three articles, which discuss “the characteristics of the Republic,” an academic move to officially integrate Kurdish culture into Turkey’s education system is already regarded as a sign of development.

“When we established the School of Eastern Languages, I had planned to set up a Kurdish Language and Literature Department and kept re-applying to YÖK [Higher Education Board]. This city is the center of upper Mesopotamia, and Kurdish [culture] is a major part of this,” Artuklu University Rector Serdar Bedii Omay said.

Full story here.

Fatih Akin presents Law of the Border in Lyon

The theatre is full of people. Even I, with a press pass, have to sit on the floor. I must admit I didn't expect all this success for a Turkish film from French - and especially Lyonnese - people.

Fatih Akin (right) with Thierry Frémaux

It's October 4th. Fatih Akin is here, at the Institut Lumière, in Lyon, at the exact spot where cinema itself was born. The occasion is the Festival Lumière, a huge international event that Lyon people are rightfully proud of. The great German-Turkish film maker is here to present the restored version of Hudutların Kanunu (Law of the Border, 1966). The screenplay was written by Ömer Lüfti Akad, who also directed the movie, and Yilmaz Güney, the Kurdish popular actor and film maker author of the Cannes Palme d'Or winner Yol (1982).

This version of Law of the Border has been released this year by the World Cinema Foundation at Cineteca di Bologna. The restoration "was made possible - the World Cinema Foundation explains - through the use of a positive print provided by Nil Gurpinar, daughter of the film’s producer, and held by the Turkish Ministry of Culture. As this print is the only known copy to survive the Turkish Coup d’Etat in 1980 – all other film sources were seized and destroyed – the restoration required a considerable amount of both physical and digital repair. The surviving print was extremely dirty, scratched, filled with mid-frame splices and sadly missing several frames. Although the film was shot in black and white, it was also printed on color stock resulting in significant decay. The restoration work produced a new 35mm dupe negative".  It's pretty much what Fatih Akin tells us, adding that a full 15-second scene is missing as well.

Akin is introduced to the audience by Thierry Frémaux, manager of the Institut Lumière where the film is shown. When Frémaux thanks all the Turks present in the theater, the room is shaken by clapping and roaring. Which explains the success of this event.

Akin explain why this film is so important: "Before this movie Turkish cinema was just a sort of fairy tale cinema, with white skinned Turks and blond women. Law of the Border was the first film to show real Turks".

The role of the main character is played by Güney himself: "The film gives you an idea on how and why the Kurdish question started - continues Akin. - Güney was born here, and put much of his story in it".

Silence now. The film starts. And it is powerful.

The new French war on religion

It's the title of a column (hereby linked) published on April 15 on Hürriyet on line. The article could be the usual attack by a Muslim to a Western country, but when a Turk attacks France the issue is always larger than that, and in this specific case the author, Mustafa Akyol, shows a remarkably moderate tone, he makes his point without shouting, and with a certain amount of criticism towards Turkey itself.

The issue is, ça va sans dire, as follows:

The burqa, the all-covering face veil, which is worn by very few women in France, is now banned by law. So, French policemen are fining veiled women, or, far worse, dragging them to their headquarters to admonish them about the right way of life.

And Akyol's point is:

Meanwhile the zestful president of the French Republic, Mr. Nicolas Sarkozy, is enlightening us about the virtues of this ban. It is for upholding "French values of equality and secularism," he says. I bet it is. The problem is that those "French values" do not seem to honor the right be left alone from government interference. Alas, they even justify a tyranny, which mirrors that of the Taliban: while those Afghan despots force women to put the burqa on, their French counterparts force them to take it off.
Now, what you and I think about the burqa does not matter here. In fact, I am among those who believe that it is a bad medieval tradition, which has nothing to do with Islam, and should better be abandoned. So, if the women in that excessive veil asked my opinion, I would advise them to take it off, too. But advice is the furthest point that I, and anybody else, can legitimately go. We cannot use state powers to "liberate" those women from what they wear out of their genuine convictions – just like the fact that an ideological nudist cannot claim to forcefully "liberate" us from our shirts, pants and underwear.

The attack to Sarkozy goes even farther than that:

Mr. Sarkozy, whose il-liberalism is only matched by his arrogance, heralds even more fronts in this culture war. He says he wants “no halal food options in school canteens, no prayers outside and no minarets.” Just replace the word “halal” with “kosher” here, and the “minaret” with “star of David.” You will get the poisonous French anti-Semitism of a century ago – the times of Captain Dreyfus. The difference today is just the change in the composition of the hated Semites – now they are the Arabs, and, by extension, all Muslims.

For a country where anti-Semitism is a sort of taboo (you might end up being label as "anti-Semitic" just by criticizing Israeli's politics), this is quite a blow.

But here comes the real issue, the one that Turks are sick of having to swallow all the time:

We in Turkey very well know that this rampant Islamophobia in France is the main reason why the majority of French society is categorically against Turkey’s accession into the European Union. That’s why we are not terribly impressed by the French critiques of our democracy, such as Ms. Marland-Militello, the parliamentarian who questioned Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on religious freedom in Turkey in Strasbourg early this week. Erdoğan’s rhetoric was indeed a bit harsh in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, or PACE, meeting, and a few of his arguments were really not convincing. But his reaction to the self-righteous and overbearing attitude Turks have being facing from some Europeans, especially the French, was understandable.

Here comes now the self-criticism, and the reason why every attack to France from Turkey, and vice versa is more like the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.

We in Turkey are also realizing these days that some of our misfortunes in the past century stem from our big mistake of taking France as a beacon of modernity. We imported the fanatically anti-religious laicite of the Third French Republic, which not only brought oppression to our believers, but also paranoia to our seculars. Similarly, we imported the assimilation-focused nationalism of successive French Republics, and were drawn into a madness that our Ottoman ancestors would have never dreamed of: banning languages and cultures other than Turkish. Hence we created our own “Kurdish problem.”

Read the rest of it here.

Karayilan: "The EU and the US are responsible for the stalemate in the solution of the Kurdish issue"

This interview was recorded in North Iraq on March 23rd. Turkish Diary does not necessarily share the opinions of the interviewee. However, since we had a chance to look at the issue from a viewpoint different from the official ones, our duty as journalists was to take this chance and show it to our readers. We are confident they are smart enough to tell the difference between truth and propaganda.

The Qandil Mountains, in Iraqi Kurdistan. We arrived here expecting training camps and PKK fighters all over the place. We find houses, children playing, women who greet us - all we can say in Kurdish is rojbas, have a good day - and serve us rice and chicken, and a smiling representative of PKK, who, behind his glasses and thick eyebrows, explains us kindly in English what we are going to do. We are here to meet a "leader" - we were not told who, although we already imagine who that could be. After lunch, they bring us a bit further into the mountains. Here we do find young fighters armed with Kalashnikovs. And here is where we learn we were right - the person we are meeting is Murat Karayilan, top leader of the guerrilla.

In the last few years it seems your goals have changed, you are no longer a separatist group. Why are you still fighting?

You are aware that the culture, the identity, all the national rights of the Kurdish people have always been denied. There has also been violence and oppression against this people. Because of that, the Kurdish people decided to protect themselves through struggle, through arms. But since 1999, August 2nd, we have been trying to solve the Kurdish question through peaceful means, because we believe that the Kurdish question can be solved not through war but only through political means. It's a social problem, so there can be only a political solution to it. So our struggle right now is a political, democratic struggle. What we want is a political, democratic solution within the Turkish borders. Our motto is: "A democratic Turkey for an autonomous Kurdistan".

What is the model for this autonomous Kurdistan?

I have a number of examples. Spain, Scotland, Belgium... we can give quite a number of examples in Europe. Through dialogue we could take all these examples and solve the issue. We are not asking much. The question can be solved with positive side effects for everyone.
Another example is France, the first nation-based State. Turkey sees France as an example, but there are different practices in Turkey. Whatever the French government has do;nene for Corsica, all those rights, if given to Kurdish people, they will be accepted, there is nothing more.
the problem is that AKP today says that yes, there are Kurdish people, but in the meantime they say that within the Turkish people there's a Kurdish people. Other than that there is no Kurdish people. This means there are many ethnic groups in Turkey, but they are all Turkish. It's a way of playing with words. The assimilation policy that has continued for the last 86 years is still going on.

Since there are many examples of autonomy in Europe, do you think Turkey can be a part of Europe?

If there are changes in Turkey, why not?
We believe that the Kurdish issue is the main issue which can change Turkey democratically.
If Turkey changes its approach to the Kurdish issue, if it changes democratically... then why not?

The government has proposed constitutional reforms. What do you think of that?

These changes cannot bring democracy in Turkey, because of the mentality, of the approach, which is still the mentality of the 12 September 1980 coup. AKP is just having problems with the judiciary, and they are trying to overcome this. That's the only reason they are discussing the changes in the Constitution, nothing more than that. The mentality is the same, and this mentality cannot bring any democratic changes in Turkey.

But if the judiciary is less powerful, there will be no longer episodes such as the ban of DTP in Turkey. Isn't this positive?

It's not important at all. Of course it's positive, however for the Kurdish issue this has no relevance, because there will be no change on two crucial issues.
The first one is the 10 percent threshold in general elections. The second is the law on terrorism. For example, they give a lot of prison sentences to children. A woman can have a 7-year prison sentence just because she shouted certain slogans and carried a banner.
Erdogan is dealing with the problems they have, not the Kurdish people.

A few weeks ago Osman Öcalan said that if his brother was released and put to house arrest, PKK would disarm. Is this true?

That person has nothing to do with us, we do not have any relations at all, from time to time some people try to use him. So, it is not true.
Whatever that person said has nothing to do with us. At the beginning of February this year we proposed a road map for the solution of the Kurdish question in peaceful terms.
4 main steps need to be done:

• all the operations - military and political - have to be stopped
• since a lot of politicians have been arrested - some MPs, some mayors, members of the party, over 1.500 politicians - they have to be released
• we believe Abdullah Öcalan can play an effective role in the peace process, so he should be put to house arrest
• after these 3 conditions are fulfilled, the dialogue can start immediately

So, at that time, will the PKK disarm?

If the dialogue starts, this matter of arms can be taken as part of the dialogue, it can be discussed. We are not only 3 or 5 people, we are thousands of people, so what is the situation of this people going to be? How will the disarmament take place? On what conditions? Once the dialogue starts, we can discuss all these things there.

Öcalan is seen by Turks as a symbol of this war, of terrorism, so even if the government wanted to give him an effective role, it would be very difficult for them, they would meet a lot of resistance, so how do you propose to do that?

Such claims were already made before. For example, in South Africa, with the Mandela case, or for Yasser Arafat in the Palestinian case. But in the end if they hadn't spoken to Mandela, they wouldn't have solved the issue. The same happened with the Palestinian issue. Both Mandela and Arafat were seen as terrorists, terrorist leaders.
So, first of all Turkey has to change its language. Second, they have to make sincere steps, in order to solve the Kurdish issue. There is no terrorist leader, Abdullah Öcalan is not a terrorist at all. This is only a name given to the opposition.
Today millions of people - as you saw during the Newroz in Diyarbakir -shout "we are PKK". That's the reality, that's the approach of the people, and using other words, other languages is not going to help solve the Kurdish question.
But I don't believe the real problem is Turkey. The problem is Europe and the US. They are the ones who are affecting the solution period.

In what sense?

While the armed struggle was going on, the European countries never put our organisation's name in the list of terrorist organizations. But in 1999, we decided to change our strategy, Abdullah Öcalan at that time went to Europe in order to open a pathway for a peaceful and democratic solution to the Kurdish issue - as you know he has been to Italy.
At that time Mr D'Alema and the Italian government were approached frankly by Abdullah Öcalan. D'Alema even went to Germany to speak with Schroeder regarding the Kurdish issue and Abdullah Öcalan, he said Europe should make a conference on the Kurdish issue, but Germany didn't accept. After an international conspiracy our leader Abdullah Öcalan was illegally captured and given to Turkey. So at that time the European countries never approached the issue to solve it peacefully and democratically - they could, at that time, but they did not, and after 1999 our organisation made a declaration that as a new strategy we were going to find a peaceful and democratic solution.
After the declaration we made, we announced that we were giving up arms. The EU in 2002 put us in the terrorists list.
This period showed us that the EU does not want a peaceful and democratic solution of the Kurdish issue. And for all these years the EU has given support to Turkey, militarily and politically. The same occurred with the US.

All photos are ©Giovanni Sacchetti. For the full reportage visit his website.
For a video version of the interview, please contact Turkish Diary.

Turkey is to allow Kurdish television as peace process gathers pace - Times Online

Turkey’s Government has unveiled a “historic” offer to end its 25-year armed conflict with Kurdish fighters that has cost more than 40,000 lives.

Besir Atalay, the Interior Minister, told parliament that he intended to end permanently the conflict with separatists, who are thought to have about 6,000 fighters. “Our slogan is more freedom for everybody,” Mr Atalay said yesterday, outlining what he described as “an open-ended process” to “end terrorism and raise the level of democracy”.

One of the first steps would be to lift a ban on private television channels broadcasting in Kurdish. The Government would then end a ban on political campaigning in the language, and permit the restoration of Kurdish names to towns and villages given Turkish names since the 1950s. A committee will be established to address Kurdish concerns that they suffer discrimination.

Read the full story on Times Online

Turkish regulator to extend broadcasting time of private stations in Kurdish

From EJC Media News:

The Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) of Turkey is planning to extend the period of time private television and radio stations are allowed to broadcast in Kurdish. Private TV stations currently have the right to broadcast programmes in Kurdish for a maximum of four hours a week, and radio stations for a maximum of five hours a week. Private TV and radio stations which broadcast in Kurdish include Gün TV, Söz TV and Medya FM. The RTÜK's decision to extend the broadcasting time allowed to private TV and radio stations for Kurdish programming came only days after the launch of the country's first 24-hour television channel broadcasting in Kurdish. The public use of Kurdish was prohibited following the 1980 military coup until 1991. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan praised the new Kurdish channel, terming it 'a very important initiative to strengthen ties between the public and the state.' (Today's Zaman via Media Network Weblog)

Israel and Turkey: so different, yet so similar, yet so different...

Turkey has recently condemned Israel's offensive in Gaza. Ankara has even decided to suspend its mediating efforts between Israel and Syria.

It would be easy to dismiss such a position as just solidarity with the Muslim brothers and sisters in Gaza. Not that it would be wrong. But I would like to change the perspective in the issue, noticing that Israel and Turkey, two long-standing allies, have more in common than one could imagine. And that is what I am going to highlight right now.

1. Both Turkey and Israel are countries which are strongly defined by their main religions, and yet both are convinced secular countries. In both cases religion identifies largely with ethnicity (with the important exceptions of Kurds, of course, where ethnicity is predominant, and Alevis, who are not considered as a religion minority). Which has brought discrimination and / or war against religious and / or ethnic minorities. The modalities are different, but the similarities are striking.

2. Both Turkey and Israel are countries which have been artificially created by the international community. Israel, through the partition of Palestine into two states decided by the United Nations in 1947; Turkey, through the Treaty of Lausanne, which in 1923 replaced the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres, actually reintegrating a series of territories which had been previously stripped off it, and frustrating the Kurds' hopes for an independent State (hopes that had been fed by the Treaty of Sèvres). I should add that the international community has not little responsibility in the Armenian genocide.

3. This may be little more than a curiosity, but I think it's significant. Both countries have compulsory military service. In Israel, it applies both to men (3 years) and women (2 years); in Turkey, it's mandatory only for men (15 months). I admit I don't know what the consequences of this are in Israel (where a limited amount of conscientious objection exists anyway), but I know in Turkey for a long time this situation helped PKK recruit militants, since many Kurds did not wish to be sent to fight against their own fathers or brothers, preferring rather fight at their side.

4. Both countries are just a few weeks away from the next electoral rendez-vous. On February 10, Israelis will vote for the next government (and, for those of you who can read French, I suggest that you go through this interesting article by Le Monde); on March 29, municipal elections will take place in Turkey.
   

Let me focus on this last point. The key issue in Turkey's local elections will be the Kurdish majority regions (what PKK and in general militant Kurds refer to as “Kurdistan”, a word that in Turkey can bring you straight to prison). On the subject, I can recommend you this article on the Christian Science Monitor.

Now, what has been the big news in Turkey in the last few days (apart from Nazim Hikmet's rehabilitation)? I quote from Reuters:

Turkey has launched its first 24-hour Kurdish-language TV station

Which brings me to the conclusion:

1. Israel is moving towards elections → Israel bombs Palestinians

2. Turkey is moving towards elections → Turkey gives more rights to Kurds
   

Of course Kurds are not satisfied, and they are not completely paranoid in considering this decision as a way by the government to get as many votes as they can, in short a propaganda move. It is also true that Ankara has quite a double-face attitude: while PKK is considered a terrorist group, soon after Hamas won the elections the AKP government welcomed to Turkey Khaled Meshal, the exiled Hamas leader. And they never uttered a word about the rockets fired against Israel.

Nonetheless, one cannot help noticing that making propaganda through opening up to minorities is a more democratic way than bombing civilians. So, what are the main differences in this situation? Why do two similar countries in two similar situations act in such different ways?

First of all, Turkey is a EU candidate. It is true that in the last few years the great reform impulse that marked the first period of the AKP government has slowed down, if not thoroughly stopped. And the new nationalistic vague has not helped in that sense. It is also true that this government is struggling hard at least to show a nice image of itself, which is surely not enough, but it's helping improvement. And improvement is never easy, especially for a proud people like Turks. The journey is still long, but the path is the right one.

Now, this doesn't mean of course that Israel should be a candidate to the EU, but at least it shows that the EU can actually have a role in international politics. More than that: personally, I think we have a responsibility in that sense.

But in all this story we must not forget one decisive point: in Turkey Kurds vote. In Israel Palestinians don't.

Turkey's Kurdish TV channel opens to mixed reviews

(From Reuters.com)

DIYARBAKIR, Turkey, Jan 2 (Reuters) - Turkey has launched its first 24-hour Kurdish-language TV station in what the government called a democratic new era for minority Kurds.

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan extended best wishes in once-banned Kurdish, but some Kurdish politicians criticised the New Year launch of state-run TRT 6 as a ploy to woo voters ahead of March local elections.

Some viewers were concerned that programming would become state propaganda, underscoring scepticism in a region scarred by decades of violence and poverty.

Turkey, which aspires to join the European Union, has been under pressure to expand cultural and political rights of its estimated 12 million Kurds, a sixth of the population.

Read the full story

Will the commander resign?

Well, that's what I call a piece of news!

After the attack on the Aktütün military outpost on Oct. 3, killing 17 soldiers, something new has happened; for the first time people are openly starting to question the General Staff.

See the full story on Today's Zaman.

Turkey’s state TV to broadcast in Kurdish, Persian, Arabic in March

From Media News:

Ibrahim Sahin, Director General of the state-owned Turkish Radio and Television Corporation (TRT), said a new TV station in Kurdish, Persian and Arabic will start broadcasting in March of next year. Sahin said the Kurdish station will use the Hot Bird satellite, which is used by Roj TV, a popular regional station that authorities regard as a mouthpiece for the PKK. TRT's Kurdish station will be available not only in the mainly Kurdish Southeast but also in Iraq, Iran and the European states where Kurds reside. Observers say the latest move is an attempt to attract viewers away from Denmark-based Roj TV. Kurdish critics say the TRT's allocation of a station for Kurdish-language broadcasting will prove beneficial for social unity. However, they also noted it should be well designed so as not to allow any room for bureaucratic manoeuvring. Parliament passed a bill at the end of May allowing the TRT to broadcast programmes in languages other than Turkish. State broadcaster TRT began airing weekly 30-minute programmes in Kurdish and several other minority languages in 2004 as part of Turkey's bid to join the European Union. But the Turkish political and military establishment has long feared that encouraging minority languages might harm the unity among Turkey's 72 million people. Sahin said there is a high demand in Arab countries for Arabic and Persian broadcasts from Turkey. With its Persian station, Turkey will reach at least 20 million Azerbaijanis living in Iran, Sahin added. (Today's Zaman via Media Network Weblog)

Turkey jails Kurdish Nobel nominee

A Turkish court has sentenced Leyla Zana, a Kurdish politician and former Nobel peace prize nominee, to two years in prison for spreading "terrorist" propaganda, court officials said.

Zana was convicted in the southeastern Turkish city of Diyarbakir for a speech she made at Kurdish festival last year. In the speech, she said that the Kurdish people had three leaders, Massoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani, Kurdish politicians in northern Iraq, and Abdullah Ocalan, the jailed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) leader. Zana came to prominence in 1994 when she was convicted for links to the PKK, which is outlawed in Turkey.

She was released in 2004 after Turkey's appeals court overturned her conviction and that of three other Kurdish former politicians.

Full story here.

Kurdish photos

Disclaimer: all the images in this post are under copyright and cannot be used, even partially, without the autors' authorization.

The photos the title is about are not mine. Luckily, I'd say.

In Diyarbakir, where I was a couple of weeks ago, for the Newroz, I met two interesting photographers, who were working on Kurdish pictures.


Here is a sample of Piergiorgio Casotti's work. Many more photos (and, I would say, even better than this one, that he graciously allowed me to use) are on his website.

He was in Turkey for a few weeks, so he has quite a portfolio on Kurds.

Below you can see Ipek, one of our guides. A Kurdish young woman who, like most Kurds, has a story that deserves to be told, one day. This picture, as well as the last one, was taken by Melania Comoretto. She too has a website, and she seems to prefer portraits. She especially likes to work on women who, just like Ipek, have stories that deserve to be told.

On Sunday Melania will be one of the photographers to take part in the Rome International Festival.

Turkish Invasion of Iraq "Less Likely"

From Military.com:

Turkey has shown "great restraint" in dealing with attacks on its soil carried out by Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK) militants based in northern Iraq and the risk of a "major invasion" has diminished, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said in Brussels on Nov. 20.

Zebari was in Brussels to meet European Union officials in view of forging a trade and cooperation agreement between his country and the 27-member bloc.

Speaking ahead of a meeting planned for later on Tuesday with EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, Zebari said his government was "working closely with Turkey" to find "a reasonable solution" to the crisis.

Full story

Laçiner: "Turkey's EU accession is first of all an ethical issue"

Do you like this article? Rate it on GroundReport.

I was in Istanbul on holiday, so I wasn't prepared for an interview. But when Aykan, a friend from Ankara, proposed me to meet Ömer Laçiner, it would have been a crime to refuse.

Laçiner is a writer, an editor, but first of all a socialist. One of those who had to live several years abroad as a political refugee in the past. He did so in France, that's why he speaks to me in French. Today, he's so respected in Turkey that even Zaman, a newspaper with Islamist sympathies, happens to interview him.

I meet him at Iletişim's, Orhan Pamuk's publishing house, where he's the editor in chief of the monthly Birikim. I forget to take a picture of him so I have to confess that the photo you can see here is stolen from some website. And, since I had no recorder with me, all I'm going to write now comes just out of my memory.

I haven't prepared an interview, so I tell him we are just going to have a friendly chat, and the beginning is quite embarassing. I have no idea where to start, but he expects me to do it. So, since I have met him because of my book, and my book is about Turkey's EU accession, I ask him his opinion on the matter. I don't know much of him, but Aykan has briefed me a little, so I already know he's in favour of Turkey joining the EU. I expect the usual list of advantages for Turkey and the EU and, maybe, the whole world, if the accession process will be successful. But he surprises me: "I think a real socialist is first of all an internationalist, so that's why I'm in favour of the EU accession". I'm not sure I have understood, so I ask him what kind of advantages would come out of it, but he says: "The issue are not advantages. There will be advantages and disadvantages. For me it's an ethical question".

I begin to like the man: for once I find someone who is simply coherent with his political positions, who doesn't just put pros and cons on a balance and then calculates what's best for their own interests. I could agree or not with him, but I surely could not help respecting him.

The conversation then gets easier, and I ask him questions about anything that comes to my mind: the present government, Kurds, the military... My first impression is confirmed.

About AKP and the present government, he doesn't believe in a secret Islamist agenda, but he also thinks sometimes they are not doing enough for the accession process. I tell him that once I met people from IHD, a human rights organization, in Diyarbakir, who said that reforms had been made too fast and judges can't keep the pace. I also evoke the past incoherences, when the government actually fuelled anti-EU nationalism, and he says: "This government is not going to go fast on reforms, because they are afraid to lose consensus. When nationalism rises, they slow down".

And about the judges: "There is a fight going on between the juduciary and the government. The problem is that many judges are very conservative". I evoke the Wordpress issue, and tell him I had to explain to someone that Wordpress was blocked in Turkey not by the government but by a court. Too many people think they are the same thing, but it isn't so.

And, of course, there is the "secularist-Islamist" issue. The night before, Aykan had tried to explain to me that... well, I stopped him by saying: "Yes, I know: it's just a fight for power". I'm not the naïve Westerner who believes it's a fight for ideas. Of course it has to do with the military progressively losing power. I ask Laçiner what are the economical issues, and he answers: "The military is the third or fourth financial force in Turkey". This explains a lot of things.

But it doesn't explain why the rallies have stopped. It seems to me that everything got quiet, last Spring, after Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan met Armed forces chief General Yaşar Büyükanıt. I ask him what they could possibly have said to each other, and he answers: "Who knows?", with that ironical smile you can often see on Turkish faces when they don't want to say too much. But he adds: "I think it's the election that has made all the difference: with such results, AKP and the government have got stronger. But maybe the military is just up to something, and preparing to counterattack. Nobody can tell".

So, I ask him if the Parliament "new entry", the Kurds, could make some difference and push for reforms, since they are strongly in favour of the EU accession. He looks disenchanted: "Unfortunately the Kurds don't have good politicians. The Kurdish issue is the most important issue in Turkey, but it is not the only one. And they only think of that, they don't have a wider agenda". After years covering the Kurdish issue, I can't but agree - although painfully - with him.

Where is the DTP candidate?

Five years ago, the pro-Kurdish party, which was called DEHAP, and now is DTP, failed to enter parliament, in spite of collecting more than 6 percent of the national vote, because of the 10 percent threshold. Once bitten, twice shy, so this time, to cirvumvent the threshold, DTP doesn't run as a party for the elections, but there are DTP representatives who run as independents.

But only a few months ago, when early elections were called, the rules changed. Here is how Turkish Daily News explains it:

As regards independent candidates, on the other hand, no one can defend that either the ruling AKP or the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) performed in any manner compatible with democracy when they legislated in haste to include names on independents in the joint ballot sheets rather than letting them run on separate voting papers. They did that hoping that the practice will lead to confusion among the mostly illiterate voters of the southeast "where many pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) people are running as independent candidates" and thus the number of "unwanted DTP people" in Parliament would be limited.

It's always a pleasure to learn tricks and counter-tricks in Turkey. Even funnier than in Naples. Even in this case, Kurds didn't stop to complain, and acted. As says the Kurdish blog Rastî,

DTP has been working to overcome the obstacles placed in its path by those in power who keep Kurds out of the political process. Specifically, it's been educating its voter base on the new ballots and how to find DTP candidates on the ballots. This is no small task given that Amed"s (Diyarbakır) ballot is some two meters long. DTP has hit upon the idea of creating and passing out templates for the ballots, that have a hole in the place where the independent DTP candidate's name is located. Another plan is to use pieces of string to measure the distance to the independent's name. Failing these helps, DTP is encouraging voters to take underage children with them, who can read the ballot for them, a rule that is applied throughout Turkey.

More details in Turkish Daily News:

In an effort to overcome the obstacles in front of it, the DTP has launched a regional program to ensure its electorate vote for them.

The first plan is to divide provinces into smaller regions in order to ensure that all DTP candidates receive an equal share of the vote by assigning specific regions to individual candidates.

While preparing their election placards, the DTP placed the photos of each candidate with a list of regions underneath in an effort to ensure all votes don't go to a single popular candidate.

In Diyarbakır, four candidates were assigned regions according to the support the party received in the 2002 elections. (...)

Meanwhile in Van, the local DTP bureau has turned its election campaign into a literacy drive in an effort to ensure that its voters, some of whom don't read Turkish, find the independent DTP candidate on the ballot box.

Illiterate women are taught how to find the name of the candidate on the paper. (...)

In Van alone, 150 DTP members are assigned the duty of teaching supporters how to locate the candidate's name on the paper.

The only independent candidate supported by the DTP, Fatma Kurtulan from Van, said other parties had their logo on the ballot paper. "We are having some problems about some women not knowing how to read and write. We need to visit each woman in their home and teach them how to find our name."

And here is how it works in practice:

What's really happening in Turkey?

The recent events in Turkey seem to have stirred many people's curiosity. Friends and colleagues keep asking me questions such as: "Are all these demonstrations real or is it just the media?" or "Is AKP really an Islamist party?" or "Why is the current president opposing the constitutional reform?" and so on.

So, I think it's time for me to give you some insight, with a selection of articles and analyses I have found on the web.

Concerning the cohabitation between secularism and Islam in Turkey, I find this article most illuminating:

KONYA, Turkey: In the not too distant past here in Turkey's religious heartland, women would not appear in public unless they were modestly dressed; a single woman was not able to rent an apartment on her own, and the mayor proposed restoring a segregation of the city's buses by sex.

Fears of those kinds of restrictions have led thousands of Turks to march in many cities over the past month, inflamed by secularist politicians. A political party with a past in Islamic politics, led by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has tried to capture the country's highest secular post. Once it succeeds, their argument goes, Turkey will be dragged back to an earlier era when Islam ran the state.

But here in Konya, a leafy city on the plains of central Turkey, the rule of Erdogan's party has done no such thing. In the paradox of modern Turkey, the party here has had a moderating influence, helping to open a guarded society and make it more flexible.

Full article (Source: Herald Tribune)

And what is going on between the government and the military? A "war of nerves" according to the Lebanese Daily Star, which explains:

(...) these tensions have heightened as a result of changes in the top echelons of the Turkish armed forces, particularly the replacement last August of General Hilmi Ozkok as chief of the Turkish General Staff. Ozkok was a moderate who maintained a low profile and sought to develop good working relations with Erdogan. By contrast, his successor, General Yasar Buyukanit, is a strong secularist who has been far more outspoken in asserting the military's views.

Full article

As for the constitutional reform, even the judiciary, whose independence from the power has been reasserted by the decision to invalidate the first presidential vote, does not consider it a threat:

Tülay Tuğcu, Chief Justice of the Turkish Supreme Court, said that parliament-approved changes to the constitution that would allow Turks to elect their president by popular vote do not mean a “regime change in Turkey.”

Full article (Source: Hürriyet)

But there is a category of people who see themselves threatened by one of the reforms: the Kurds, as explains in detail France Presse:

The bill, which needs the approval of President Ahmet Necdet Sezer to come into force, amends a constitutional provision relating to independent candidates.

It was passed a day after the DTP decided to field independents rather than run as a party in the July 22 election to bypass the 10-percent national threshold that allows parties access to parliament.

Once they are voted in as independents, the Kurdish deputies can regroup under the DTP banner.

Under the bill, the names of independent candidates will figure on the same ballot paper as all the parties in the running, contrary to current practice under which their names appear on separate voting slips.

The measure is widely seen as a bid to obstruct voters in the mainly Kurdish southeast, where many are illiterate or do not speak Turkish, and are likely to have trouble picking their candidate's name from the long list of parties and other independents.

Many Kurds have become legislators in Turkey as members of mainstream parties, but pro-Kurdish movements failed to overcome the 10-percent national threshold despite usually dominating in the southeast, where they traditionally win the local elections.

Full article (Source: Kurdish Aspect)

But why do secularists oppose the reform? The answer is in Southeast European Times:

Outgoing President Ahmet Necdet Sezer is a staunch secularist. Over the past five years, he has played an important role in striking a balance between the country's fiercely secular military and the Islamic-rooted government. Sezer vetoed several bills on the grounds that they violated the principle of secularism, and he also vetoed the appointments of at least 350 Islamist-leaning officials to key positions.

Turkey's political system is a parliamentary democracy, with power vested mainly in the government. But the president can veto laws after their initial adoption by Parliament, and then has the right to file an appeal to the Constitutional Court against legislation he opposes. He also appoints governors, ambassadors, police chiefs, ministry department heads and their deputies, senior judges, members of Higher Education Board, university rectors, and the head of the central bank. He is commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Turkey's military, courts and universities are traditional bastions of secularism.

Given this significant role of the president, the reaction to Gul's candidacy is not surprising. The AKP already controls parliament and the government. If it won the presidency, the party would hold all the key branches of power. Turkey would, practically speaking, be under one-party rule. Secularists have not welcomed the idea of directly electing the president, seeing the AKP's move as another threat to checks and balances. The influential business association TUSIAD warns that such changes should only be introduced following general elections, after comprehensive discussion and consensus among all the parties.

Full article

Finally, if you are interested in the Arab perspective of the issue, I suggest you to have a look at the Financial Times.

Hasankeyf on my French blog

On my French travel blog A la recherche du lieu perdu I posted yesterday the report of my 2005 travel to Hasankeyf. If you can read French, you might enjoy it.

Untying Turkey's head-scarf knot

From The Christian Science Monitor:

That strategic ally so vital to NATO; that bridge between Europe and the Middle East; that symbol of a relatively stable, secular democracy in a Muslim nation: Could Turkey now rupture over Islam's role in public life?
On Sunday, at least 700,000 protesters marched in Istanbul, insisting that Turkey maintain its secular laws and demanding the resignation of the government, which is led by the Islamic Justice and Development Party, or AKP.

Sparking the protest is the election of Turkey's president, who is chosen by parliament - which in turn is dominated by the AKP. At first the AKP prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, wanted the job. That met with a backlash from demonstrators and a warning from the military. Last week, the AKP foreign
minister, Abdullah Gul, became the party's official candidate - setting off Sunday's much larger protest and another military warning.

What's objectionable about these men? Their wives wear the head scarf, a sign of Islamic modesty.

The controversy stretches further than a piece of silk fabric, although the covering itself is no small matter. The strictly secularist Constitution forbids wearing a head scarf in a public building. The ban is thanks to the revered founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who also gave women the right to vote and changed the alphabet from Arabic to Roman letters.

Full story

See also:
Time to start talking Turkey (dailynews.com)

ISTANBUL may be a far cry from the Vegas strip, but when it comes to politics, what happens in Turkey does not stay in Turkey.

In fact, this country could have a greater impact on the spread of Islamism and the direction of the war in Iraq than anywhere else.

Full story

Turkey's prime minister avoids prosecution for comment on Kurdish rebel chief

From the International Herald Tribune:

ANKARA, Turkey: A Turkish prosecutor ruled Thursday that the prime minister had not committed a crime by referring to jailed Kurdish rebel chief Abdullah Ocalan as "esteemed Ocalan" in a radio interview seven years ago, the government-run Anatolia news agency reported.

A prosecutor investigated whether Recep Tayyip Erdogan had violated a law which bans the praising of crime and criminals when he made the remark.

Dozens of Kurdish politicians have been charged with the offense, including Ahmet Turk, the leader of the Kurdish Democratic Society Party, who received a six-month jail sentence.

But on Thursday, Ankara's Deputy Chief Prosecutor Hikmet Onen said he found no ground to prosecute Erdogan after listening to recordings of the interview with Australia's SBS Network and added that the statute of limitations would prevent him from opening a case, Anatolia reported.

Full story

Turkey advances on minorities list

From Today's Zaman:

Turkey has risen to 39 from 54 on a list of countries with the most-threatened minorities amid fears about the safety of its Kurdish and Roma populations, according to a report by a leading human rights group on Tuesday.

Read the rest of the article.

See also:

• Scuffles overshadow Kurdish New Year in Turkey (EuroNews)
• Nowruz is peaceful; Zana is tense (Sabah)