Earthquakes in Turkey: a nightmare repeating itself

The devastating earthquake that struck Turkey yesterday is unfortunately only one of the many seismic events occurring periodically in this country, which has a complex tectonic structure. Everybody's mind goes back to the 1999 earthquake, in the Northwest, which had a dreadful death toll. Orhan Pamuk remembers those dramatic moments in his book Other Colours.

I was awoken between midnight and dawn - at 3 a.m., as I was later to discover - by the first jolts. It was August 17, 1999, I was in my study in our stone house on Sedef, the little island just next to Büyükada, and my bed, which was three yards from my desk, was swaying violently like a rowboat caught in a storm at sea. A terrifying groan came from underground, from what seemed to be right under my bed. Without pausing to find my glasses, following instinct more than reason, I rushed outdoors and began to run. (...)
The first tremors lasted forty-five seconds, claiming thirty thousand lives; before they were over, I had climbed the side steps to the upper floor where my wife and daughter were sleeping. They were awake and waiting in the darkness, afraid and not knowing what to do. The electricity had failed. Together we went out into the garden and the enveloping silence of the night. The awful roar had stopped, and it was as if everything around us were likewise waiting in fear.

But I want to remember now another, slightly more recent earthquake that took place in the South East of Turkey - like the latest one - on May 1, 2003. It happened in the Bingöl province, or to be more precise,

The Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute (KOERI, 2003) of Boğaziçi University estimated that the earthquake centered at 39.01 N and 40.49 E, which places the epicenter about 15 km NW of Bingöl city.
According to official anouncements the earthquake caused the loss of 176 lives and injured about 520 people. About 362 buildings collapsed and/or were heavily damaged, and 3026 buildings were moderately-to-lightly damaged in Bingöl city center. The number of collapsed or heavily damaged buildings in the whole earthquake affected region is announced as 625 and a total of 3650 were subjected to damage of different degrees. (Japan Society of Civil Engineers, report The Bingöl Earthquake of May 1, 2003)

Non-official sources speak of more than 180 dead. 84 were children aged between 7 and 17 who were sleeping in the dormitory of their collapsed school. But it was not just a random tragedy.The Turkish State had its share of responsibility in the disaster.

The site near Bingöl where used to be the school destroyed by the 2003 earthquake

But something positive came out of it as well: a group of architects and engineers founded Bindepder, the Association in Solidarity with the Victims of Bingöl Earthquake, intending not only to intervene in times when earthquakes strike, but also to inform people before and after seismic events. I met their President, Hayip Yolcu, in Bingöl on March 2005. He explained me how dangerous this area is, how many fault lines cross it: "Bingöl is in the middle of this region, - he added-, so it's possible to reach all the cities, all the provinces around here, so it's important that this association was founded here. In the aftermath of an earthquake we don't want trained people to come from the West of Turkey to work here. We want them to come here and share their experience with us. It's important to reach people in the 6 hours following an earthquake, because you have a chance to find them alive. But after 6 hours your chances get fewer and fewer, and it takes time to come from the West, so it's essential for us to be able to be immediately operative on our own. After that, we do want the experts from the West to come, so that they can share with us their experience, information and the equipment they use".

Hayip is very critical towards the government. One example: "There was an earthquake in 1996 in Varto. After that, the government built houses for the victims. Now, during the 2003 Bingöl earthquake those houses fell down. Only two houses are OK, and if you ask people why, they answer: 'because we built them'. It's the houses built by the government that collapsed".

Hayip Yolcu showing a shoe found among the debris

It was a different government. But things don't seem to work much differently with the new one: "We know that money arrived to the government from the European Union. We know three schools were built in this area. But this money was given to people who are close to the government. For example, there are villages where the schools were not heavily damaged, but the money went to these villages, where the municipalities were close to the government".

He then brings me to the place where the school used to be. On the site, there are still trousers and shoes, macabre reminders that real children were here on that night, and that they don't need those things any more.

The new buildings

A new school has been rebuilt since, a little further away, but always on the fault line. Besides, Hayip explains, the new buildings are not earthquake-proof: "First of all, there are four floors while there shouldn't be more than two floors. Second, the restaurant should be in a separated building, while it's situated on the ground floor, where there are gases that might explode during an earthquake".

A teacher tells us what happened that night:

Hayip showing children trousers

I used to live in the school apartments. I was sleeping, and first there was a small earthquake. I went out, but it was dark, so I could not see anything. I heard voices shouting, crying... I didn't think the dormitory had collapsed, I just thought that maybe the students were crying out of fear. But then a car passed by, and when the lights fell on the school, I realized the amplitude of the destruction. Immediately, we ran to help the children. That night in the dormitory there were 199 students and one teacher. Around 50 of them managed to escape. I took my car and went to ask help from the army. People from the village and from all over the region came with lorries, and we all tried to reach the children under the debris. During the day many groups from all of Turkey arrived, but they did not have enough material, they did not have the necessary equipment. It was such a painful day, we do not want to see that happen again.

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.

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 rehabilitates poet Hikmet

From Bbc.co.uk:

Turkey says it is to restore the citizenship of one of its most illustrious poets and playwrights.

Nazim Hikmet was stripped of his citizenship for his Marxist beliefs in the 1950s after he fled the country, having spent years in Turkish prisons.

Hikmet, who died in exile in Moscow in 1963, revolutionised Turkish poetry during the 1930s and has had his work translated into some 50 languages.

Deputy PM Cemil Cicek said it was time for the government to change its mind.

"The crimes which forced the government to strip him of his citizenship at that time are no longer considered a crime," he said.

Read the full story

Turkish parliamentary commission approves bill amending Article 301

From Hürriyet:

Turkish parliament's justice committee on Friday accepted the bill to amend the controversial Article 301, which has been seen as a restriction on free speech. The committee agreed to give the mandate of opening prosecutions under the article to the justice minister, signaling a split within the ruling AKP. The initial proposal had given the mandate to the president. Turkish Justice Minister Mehmet Ali Sahin rejected claims from the opposition that the new amendment would bring an end to the protection of "Turkish values, state and nation." (UPDATED)

The controversial bill amending the Article 301 of Turkish Penal Code busied the country's agenda recently, was accepted following to discussion held in Parliamentary Justice Committee on Friday.

Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code criminalizes insulting "Turkishness." Under the amendments proposed by the government, the term "Turkishness" will be replaced by the "Turkish nation," and the term "Republic" will be replaced with "State of the Republic of Turkey."

The committee agreed to make the justice minister responsible to approve any prosecution under the law. The initial proposal by the government sought the president's greenlight for prosecutors before they could press any charges related with the article.

The committee also removed from the amendment bill presidential approval for prosecution under Article 301, which criminalizes insults against "national interests."

The bill lowers the maximum punishment from three to two years, opening the way for the postponement of prison terms for those convicted under the law.

The European Union has been calling on Turkey to amend Article 301, which has been the basis for charges against Turkish writers and journalists including Hrant Dink, Elif Safak and Orhan Pamuk.

Uneasy public rallies behind AK Party

Turks are uneasy and unhappy at their country's prospects against the backdrop of a case filed by Supreme Court of Appeals Chief Prosecutor Abdurrahman Yalçınkaya to close down the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party), a new opinion poll has revealed.

The poll, conducted by the Ankara-based MetroPOLL Strategic & Social Research Center, found an overwhelming majority of the Turkish public (71.6 percent) does not want the court to close the AK Party. Among those polled 68.4 percent viewed the case negatively, while only 27.4 percent saw it as a positive development.

Read the full story on Today's Zaman.

A threat of turmoil in Turkey

Considering a ban on the ruling party

TURKEY edged towards prolonged political and economic turmoil on Monday March 31st after the country's most senior court unanimously agreed to consider a case calling for the banning of the ruling Justice and Development (AK) party and for the prime minister to be barred from office.

The decision by the Constitutional Court could lead to a dangerous escalation in tensions between the AK party, with its roots in Islam, and its secular detractors in the army and the judiciary, who accuse the party of leading the country towards sharia rule.

In a 162-page indictment AK is accused of becoming “a centre for anti-secular activities” and the prosecutor calls for 71 of the party’s officials, including the prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to be banned from politics for five years. The court, which is dominated by secular judges, voted without exception to consider the case. A majority of the judges also agreed to hear similar charges against the president, Abdullah Gul.

Read the full story on The Economist

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.

In Turkey, Fear About Religious Lifestyle

From the New York Times:

When hundreds of thousands of protesters filled the streets of Istanbul on Sunday, it may have looked like a protest of government policy.

It was not.

Behind the slogans and signs of marchers in Istanbul on Sunday and in Ankara two weeks ago was something much more basic: a fear of the lifestyles of their more religious compatriots.

Some concerns were snobbish: religious Turks were uneducated and poor, their pesky prayer rugs got underfoot in hospital halls.

Others were less elitist and had more personal worries: how much tolerance for our secular lifestyles will an emerging class of religious Turks have?

“These people are from poor areas; they just don’t know what the government stands for,” said Aysel Tuikman, 39, a civil servant wearing a skirt, a sweater, beige pumps and pearls. “They’re only being manipulated. We are here for their good also.”

“People here are the real Turkey,” she said, waving a flag high above her head.

It is an emotional reaction to a relatively new layering of society that began 20 years ago but has accelerated recently. A massive migration from rural areas to Turkey’s cities and a large-scale economic boom have drawn an entirely new class of religious Turks from the country’s heartland into the life of its secular cities.

The class is represented by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who is challenging the secular elite, forcing a presidential candidate upon them whom they find completely distasteful.

On Friday, the military gave him a warning. It has ousted four elected governments since 1960, and seemed to be considering whether to make Mr. Erdogan’s the fifth. On Sunday, Mr. Erdogan gave a warning of his own: He will continue to push his candidate, an action that will probably lead to early national elections.

Secular Turks fear that Mr. Erdogan has a secret agenda to impose Islamic law on Turkey and that his party’s move to secure the presidency, the highest seat of secularism in Turkey, is one of the final steps needed to start that process.

Mr. Erdogan, for his part, came from Turkey’s political Islamic movements of the 1990s, but he broke with them and formed his own, which swept national elections in 2002. He has said that he would keep religion out of policy decisions, and for the most part, he has.

But for the protesters on Sunday, that was not enough.

Full story

See also:

• Constitution Court discusses the report (Sabah)
  
• Civil initiatives protest military’s statement, remember past coups (Today's Zaman)
• Turkey faces a democracy test (Turkish Daily News)
• Turkey seeks a way out of crisis in the generals' shadow (m&c)
• US urges Turk reconciliation on basis of democracy, secularism, constitution (Turkish Daily News)
• Dialogue with 'Opportunists' (Dar Al-Hayat)
• Turkey will be just fine (Turkish Daily News)
• The post-April 27 -- the Emergence of a Two-Turkey (Turkish Daily News)
• The Turkish military intervenes: Will the West lose Turkey? (The Journal of Turkish Weekly)

If the Reverse Happened . . .

Metin writes:

If the tables were turned, and the reverse of the current situation played out in Turkey, the 'secular' establishment would have been up in arms about 'Muslims' ruining democracy and its inevitabilities and 'unpredictable-ness.' But now the whole world is watching and enjoying the comedy of errors as democracy backfires and produces results that the secularists didn't intend or count on. What a mockery to avoid showing up for work for the 'politicians' of the opposition parties who lack 'individual' courage! Even if they were to vote 'No' for the Gul Presidency, they should have at least shown up. Gul will still be elected President in the third round if not the second according to the Turkish constitution. But I think the opposition simply wanted to be heard. Why they waited until the last minute to resort to idiotic tactics I'll never know.
Maybe they lack credibility and the proper etiquette to have formed an opinion earlier even when they knew all along the scenario was going to play out as it is doing so right now.

Full article

THE CORRIDOR

From Turkish Daily News:

If Turkey goes to elections, will the distribution of seats in Parliament change? Turkey is debating early elections. While some argue that early elections will be held in mid-July, others believe that Turkey will go to elections in August or September. Meanwhile, some argue that in case of annullation of the presidential elections by the Constitutional Court, the election will be held sooner.

If Turkey goes to elections, will the distribution of the seats in Parliament change? Which party will pass the election threshold? Which party will be the first party after elections? Which party will be in the government's place in Parliament? Will the government be composed of a single party or a coalition? How will the Parliament's two powers, Justice and Development Party (AKP) and Republican People's Party (CHP), perform in the elections? Ankara based Metropoll Strategic and Social Research Center conducted research on "Political Conditions in Turkey –April 2007.” The research shows the highlights of Turkey's political picture and it is very important to analyze the results of the study. If the general elections were held today, only the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Republican People's Party (CHP) will be able to surpass the 10 percent threshold to enter Parliament. As of April, the AKP's vote is at 31.6 percent and the CHP's is at 14.2 percent. With no other party able to pass the election barrier, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) trails the other two parties with 7.5 percent of the vote. While the True Path Party's (DYP) vote is at 4.7 percent, the Motherland Party's (ANAVATAN) is at 3.2 percent. The total votes of the two parties who continue their efforts to unite are at 8.3 percent. The Young Party's (GP) vote is at 4.7 percent and the Democratic Left Party's (DSP) is at 3 percent. The research shows that CHP, which raised its votes 1.3 percent due to its opposition to AKP during the presidential election process, will profit in elections. Professor Özer Sencar of Metropoll said the increase of supporters
for the main opposition party takes root from CHP's leader Deniz Baykal's strong opposition against AKP. DYP and MHP lost votes due to their passive attitudes during the presidential election process. Other independent research illustrates that three or four parties will be able to surpass the 10 percent threshold to enter Parliament. According to the research, AKP, CHP, MHP and probably DYP – if they unite with ANAVATAN- will enter Parliament. The research argues that if the Constitutional Court annuls the presidential elections, AKP, who will act as an aggrieved party, would increase its supporters and would poll at 40 percent of
the votes. Thus, the election campaign could stand on the secular-anti secular axis and only two parties, AKP and CHP would pass the election threshold. All the research shows that the political picture in Turkey will not change, if Turkey goes to election today. As Turkey's former president Süleyman Demirel stated, “Twenty-four hours are a very long time in politics.” It will be better for us to assess research results by not forgetting these cyclical factors and developments. Ankara is marching rapidly toward elections. How will Turkey's future be shaped by the presidential elections process? Which parties will pass the election threshold? We all see them.

Full article

See also:

• Turkey's powerful army weighs into presidential vote (AFP)
• EU warns Turkey's army on democracy (Aljazeera.net)
• Headscarved "First Lady" elicits strong reaction from women in Turkey (Hürriyet)
• Abramowitz: Major Political Clash in Turkey between ‘Secularists’ and ‘Islamists’ (Council on Foreign Relation)
• Gül replies to state-party criticism: Turkey is not Iraq (Today's Zaman)
• Abdullah Gül, Turkey's next president (Turkish Daily News)
• Gül declared candidate for president (Turkish Daily News)
• A compromise candidate? (Cyprus Observer)
• Discretion before valour (Economist.com)
• EPP president supports Gül's candidacy for president (ABHaber)
• Threat of coup d'etat in Turkey (Atılım)
• ANAVATAN, DYP take CHP bait, fail the democracy test (Today's Zaman)

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