EQUIVOQUES EURO-TURQUES, PAR THOMAS FERENCZI - Le Monde, 24.04.2008

EQUIVOQUES EURO-TURQUES, PAR THOMAS FERENCZI
                           Le Monde, 24.04.2008

Entre l'Union européenne et la Turquie, une étrange négociation continue de se dérouler, au
rythme de deux sessions par an, pour vérifier si ce pays, candidat à l'adhésion, répond aux
normes de "l'acquis communautaire" et pour l'inciter à s'y conformer dans les domaines où il
n'y satisfait pas. Six chapitres sur trente-cinq ont été ouverts depuis le début des pourparlers,
en octobre 2005, d'autres devraient l'être sous la présidence slovène, puis sous la présidence
française. Même si les progrès sont lents, notamment lorsqu'on compare la situation de la
Turquie à celle de la Croatie, qui a commencé à négocier au même moment, le mouvement ne
s'interrompt pas.

Mais ce qui rend étrange cette négociation, c'est qu'elle tourne à vide. Les Vingt-Sept, pour
sanctionner le refus d'Ankara d'accueillir dans ses ports et ses aéroports des navires et des
avions chypriotes, ont en effet décidé, en décembre 2006, d'exclure du débat huit chapitres
liés à l'union douanière et de laisser tous les autres sans conclusion. En outre, la France ne
veut pas discuter des sujets qui pourraient conduire, en cas d'accord, à une adhésion pleine et
entière plutôt qu'à une relation plus souple qualifiée de "partenariat privilégié". Autrement
dit, il s'agit de pourparlers en trompe-l'oeil, qui maintiennent la fiction d'une négociation mais
esquivent les principales difficultés.

Etrange est également l'attitude de Bruxelles à l'égard de l'enquête ouverte par la Cour
constitutionnelle turque, qui pourrait conduire à l'interdiction du parti islamiste au pouvoir et à
l'inéligibilité de ses dirigeants pour atteinte à la laïcité. La Commission européenne, par la
voix du commissaire à l'élargissement, Olli Rehn, crie au viol de la démocratie, oppose au
pouvoir des juges la légitimité supérieure du suffrage universel et affirme que les questions
soulevées relèvent de la controverse politique, non de la délibération judiciaire.Pourtant, le
propre d'un Etat de droit, que défend inlassablement l'Union européenne, n'est-il pas d'ériger
en valeur suprême le respect de la Constitution et de permettre à la justice, le cas échéant, de
censurer le gouvernement ?

Pour celui-ci, la seule façon d'échapper à la menace est de modifier, s'il le peut, la
Constitution, comme l'a fait le premier ministre turc, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, pour autoriser le
port du voile à l'université et comme il se propose de le faire, une nouvelle fois, pour rendre
plus difficile la dissolution d'un parti politique. Mais ces aménagements successifs
apparaissent comme des demi-mesures au moment où l'Union européenne demande à la
Turquie d'accélérer les réformes de son système politique et judiciaire afin de rendre possible
son adhésion future. On attend en particulier des autorités d'Ankara, comme vient de le
rappeler sur place le président de la Commission européenne, José Manuel Barroso, qu'elles
suppriment toutes les entraves à la liberté d'expression.

Car si le comportement de l'Union européenne suscite des interrogations, les tergiversations
de M. Erdogan font naître des inquiétudes. La question est de savoir si le premier ministre
turc est vraiment déterminé à conduire son pays vers la démocratie ou si les amis européens
de la Turquie ne sous-estiment pas "la menace d'une islamisation rampante", comme
beaucoup le redoutent en Turquie même, selon Katinka Barysch, directrice adjointe du Centre
for European Reform, un laboratoire d'idées londonien. A Bruxelles comme à Ankara des
clarifications sont nécessaires si l'on veut éviter que les suspicions n'alourdissent encore, de
part et d'autre, le climat de défiance.

TURKEY UNDER FIRE OVER LAWS BANNING INSULTS TO "TURKISHNESS"
                International Herald Tribune, 20.04.2008

"Happy is he who says: 'I am a Turk.'"

Turkey's motto is on display in schools, hospitals and military barracks. Schoolchildren recite
it like the Pledge of Allegiance. It covers hillsides in southeast Turkey, where the military is
fighting Kurdish separatists. This relentlessly patriotic message, coined by Kemal Ataturk,
founder of modern Turkey, is backed up by law: a ban on insulting "Turkishness." But it has
become a serious drag on Turkey's efforts to get its democracy into shape for joining the
European Union. The EU says it's a restriction on free speech that disqualifies Turkey for
membership.

On Friday, Parliament's justice panel began debating a government proposal to soften Article
301 of Turkey's penal code, which has been used to prosecute Nobel literature laureate Orhan
Pamuk and other intellectuals. Parliament is expected to approve the amendment as early as
this month. But critics say it's a half-measure by a government caught between liberal
opponents of the law and nationalists who see it as a cave-in to European interference.

Cengiz Aktar, an EU expert at Bahcesehir University in Istanbul, doubts it will work, because
at least 20 other articles in Turkey's penal code have "the same mentality of killing freedom of
speech." But many Turks believe even a token softening of the law rewards EU pressure, and
even threatens Turkish security. Faruk Bal, deputy chairman of the opposition Nationalist
Action Party, says it will allow Kurdish rebels to insult the Turkish state with impunity. His
party has launched a TV ad campaign against changing Article 301. It includes the refrain:
"Wake up Turkey! It is time for unity."

The change would cut the maximum sentence for denigrating Turkish identity or institutions
from three years in prison to two, suspended for first-time offenders. The justice minister
would have to approve prosecutions, and Article 301 would refer to the crime of denigrating
the "Turkish nation," rather than the vague term "Turkishness." "The government's proposal
merely tinkers with the wording of the law, while maintaining its most problematic features,"
New York-based Human Rights Watch said.

Ataturk designed his nationalist motto, "Ne mutlu Turkum diyene," as he sought to build a
strong, secular Turkey from the ashes of the Ottoman Empire, which united territories in
Europe, Africa and the Middle East under the banner of Islam. He largely succeeded, amid
war, slaughter and pressure from Western powers. Nearly a century later, many Turks believe
their nationhood faces the same threats, chiefly from the Kurdish separatists, but also from
governments and pressure groups that claim the mass killings of Armenians by Turks in the
early 20th century were "genocide." It was the genocide claim that landed Pamuk as well as
fellow novelist Elif Safak in court, and later motivated the assassination in 2007 of Hrant
Dink, a Turkish Armenian.

The Turkish Justice Ministry says 1,533 people faced prosecution under Article 301 in 2006.
Some cases, including Pamuk's, are dismissed. Many end in acquittals. Those convicted
included Dink, the murdered journalist, and lawyer Eren Keskin, prosecuted for insulting the
armed forces. Often, it's not the government but nationalist individuals who start the
prosecutions, as well as the Turkish military, according to Emma Sinclair-Webb of Human
Rights Watch.

Supporters of Article 301 say some European countries, including Germany, Italy and the
Netherlands, have similar laws. But these are hardly ever acted upon. Another section of the
penal code makes it a crime to insult state institutions or even officials. Last year a punk rock
group was prosecuted for a song attacking Turkey's equivalent of the high school SAT. It was
acquitted. Even Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan isn't immune. His Islamic-oriented
party faces a prosecutor's efforts to ban it for allegedly violating the secular principles crafted
by Ataturk.

 AUSTRIA SAYS TURKEY SHOULD BE OPEN TO ALTERNATIVES TO FULL EU
                             MEMBERSHIP
                 International Herald Tribune, 21.04.2008

Austria's foreign minister said Monday that Turkey should consider a tie-up with the
European Union short of full membership. Ursula Plassnik said membership talks to the 27-
nation bloc should continue but suggested an alternative to Turkey's cherished goal of
membership.The EU opened entry talks with Turkey in 2005, but there has been little
progress amid disagreements over Cyprus and opposition from France and other EU
countries, including Austria. "The doors should not be closed on Turkey, we need
negotiations to explore the exact contours of our relations," Plassnik told a news conference in
Ankara with her Turkish counterpart Ali Babacan. "I could imagine a tailor-made Turkish-
European community as another rational, realistic alternative," Plassnik said without
elaborating. She urged Turkey to continue with political reforms.

Turkey, a predominantly Muslim but secular country, rejects anything short of full
membership of the EU. "Turkey's accession to the EU sends out importance messages about
an alliance of civilizations, we view Turkey's accession to the EU as one of the most
important peace projects of the 21st century," Babacan said. Turkey has abolished the death
penalty and introduced broadcasting and private courses in the Kurdish language, steps
demanded by the EU before membership. Others EU demands include expanding freedom of
expression and curbing the military's influence on politics.

                     LA TURQUIE DANS L'UE D'ICI "10 Á 15 ANS"
                               Le Figaro, 21.04.2008

La Turquie pourrait adhérer à l'Union européenne dans "10 à 15 ans" à condition de
poursuivre les réformes en cours, a estimé le commissaire européen à l'élargissement, Olli
Rehn, dans une interview parue aujourd'hui dans le quotidien Die Welt, relevant que ce pays
"a encore un long chemin à parcourir" avant une adhésion. L'UE entend ouvrir deux nouveaux
chapitres de négociations avec Ankara en juin touchant au droit des entreprises et à la
propriété intellectuelle, selon M. Rehn. Seuls six des 35 chapitres de négociations ont été
ouverts depuis que Bruxelles et Ankara ont entamé des pourparlers d'adhésion en octobre
2005.

Selon le commissaire qui s'est récemment rendu à Ankara, aux côtés du président de la
Commission européenne José Manuel Barroso, l'UE souhaite notamment que la Turquie
accorde une meilleure protection aux femmes et aux minorités, ainsi qu'une plus grande
liberté d'expression. Interrogé sur une possible interdiction par la Cour constitutionnel du parti
au pouvoir AKP, M. Rehn a estimé qu'une telle mesure "nuirait au processus de réformes".

TURKEY MAY BE FIT FOR EU IN A DECADE, ENLARGEMENT CHIEF SAYS
                       EU Observer, 22.04.2008

If it remains fully committed to the reform path, Turkey could join the European Union in 10
to 15 years, EU enlargement commissioner Olli Rehn has said. He has also announced that
two more chapters out of the 35-chapter accession package - business law and intellectual
property - are likely to be opened as early as June, increasing the total number to eight.
Additional chapters, including the one on energy, could follow under the French EU
presidency in the second half of this year. The message comes at a time described by
commissioner Rehn as "a more critical phase than at any time since its negotiations to join the
EU in 2005 began."

Speaking to German daily Die Welt, he said: "It is important that the EU show it is committed
to Turkey's membership in difficult times." Turkey's constitutional court is currently looking
into a case aimed at shutting down the ruling centre-right Justice and Development Party (AK
Party), accused by prosecutors of harbouring a hidden agenda to build an Islamist state. But
the EU is critical of the move. A ban of the AK Party would harm the reform process, the
Finnish commissioner said. Mr Rehn also urged Ankara to "stay convincingly on its reform
course", singling out freedom of speech, women's rights and expanded rights for minorities.

Meanwhile, Austria reiterated on Monday (21 April) its position that the accession talks
between the EU and Turkey do not have to result in full membership. "We are aware that for
the Turkish side, the one and only exclusive goal is membership in the European Union,"
Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik said on her visit to Ankara, adding: "I could
imagine a tailor-made Turkey-European Union community as another rational, realistic
alternative." A similar view, often also described as a privileged partnership, is favoured by
German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

   FRANCE TAKES FURTHER STEP TOWARDS SCRAPPING ENLARGEMENT
                         REFERENDUMS
                      EU Observer, 22.04.2008

The French government on Wednesday (23 April) approved plans for constitutional reform
that would scrap the obligation for France to hold a referendum on any further enlargement of
the EU after Croatia. The clause making it compulsory to submit all future EU enlargements
to a referendum in France was introduced in 2005 by the then-president Jacques Chirac. "We
believe this safeguard doesn't really make sense. It sets a general rule when what we need is a
case-by-case approach, in particular for Turkey," government spokesman Luc Chatel said
following the approval of the bill by the cabinet members, according to French news channel
LCI.

The 2005 referendum clause was seen as particularly targeted at Turkey and a bid to reassure
public opinion and increase the chances of a yes vote in the upcoming referendum on the EU
constitutional treaty. However, it would also have affected all western Balkan countries –
apart from Croatia - which are hoping to join the EU in the near future. Under the proposal
adopted by the ministers yesterday, the decision on whether or not to approve a country's
accession to the EU can be taken either by referendum, or by the French Congress – a body
comprising the country's National Assembly and the Senate – which would have to approve it
by a three-fifths majority.

The French president will be the one who decides which method of ratification to use.
According to French EU affairs minister Jean-Pierre Jouyet, the proposed modification will
solve the "question of credibility" of French President Nicolas Sarkozy on the European stage.
"How do you want to negotiate, if once the negotiation is over, you say ... 'I have negotiated
with you for two years, but I cannot do anything [now], the [final] decision is not up to me, I
will hand it over to a referendum'?" Mr Jouyet told LCI.

The reform adopted yesterday also represents the most important overhaul of the French
institutions and political system in the country's modern history. Additionally, the reform
limits the number of consecutive presidential terms to two, gives new rights to citizens and
introduces the ability for the president to appear before parliament. The bill has now to go to
the parliament's lower house for discussion, which is expected to start on 20 May. In June,
senators will discuss it. Final approval must be given by both houses gathered in a
"Congress", most probably on 7 July, where a three-fifths majority will be needed for the bill
to pass.

 SECULAR STRAINS: TURKISH POLITICAL ISLAM COMES UNDER NEW FIRE
                      Financial Times, 22.04.2008

Every year on April 23, Turkey’s political, military and state leaders gather in the parliament
building in Ankara to celebrate national sovereignty day. It is one of those solemn state
occasions the country does so well – and it offers a splendid opportunity for grandstanding.
This year the speaker of parliament has invited wives of deputies to attend the event wearing
headscarves should they wish, a provocative act in a country that has banished the garment
from public life. This in turn has prompted speculation that the army top brass will boycott the
reception. Parliament is synonymous with Turkey’s republican history and the central tenet of
that history is secularism. But since the Justice and Development party (AKP) was first swept
to power in the 2002 general election, the headscarf has become the symbol of a new power
struggle in Turkey, between the secular elite – of which the army is the most important
element – and a new generation of conservative, religiously-minded Turks.

The military/judicial/bureaucratic nexus looks set for a new and perhaps final confrontation
with the AKP. If the generals are even considering a no-show, it is evidence that Turkey’s
secularists and the AKP have failed to find a modus operandi after more than five years of
uneasy cohabitation. The constitutional court is already preparing to consider a petition to
shut the party down, in what many commentators are calling a “judicial coup d’état”. The
AKP, which denies that it has any “agenda”, hidden or otherwise, to Islamise Turkey, will
present its defence in the next few days against the charge that it seeks to impose Sharia law
on Turkey. Abdurrahman Yalcinkaya, the prosecutor who filed the case with the
constitutional court last month, also wants Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister,
Abdullah Gul, the president, and 69 other party officials banned from political activity for five
years.

A legal battle is in prospect lasting perhaps for most of 2008, with the potential to paralyse the
business of government and complicate Turkey’s accession talks with the European Union. It
adds a huge element of uncertainty to the outlook for Turkey. The economy is already
slowing and the country is vulnerable to the impact of the global credit squeeze because of its
need for foreign capital to finance its current account deficit. Guven Sak, who heads the
Tepav think-tank in Ankara, says the juxtaposition of these “three crises” makes this a
difficult moment for Turkey. The case against the AKP has polarised Turkey along its most

familiar faultline – the point, as much ideological as psychological or social, at which its
austere founding vision of secularism meets the messy reality of its emergence in the past 60
years as a multi-party democracy. It is perhaps inevitable that the more democratic Turkey
becomes, the more its underlying character as a Muslim society will emerge to shape its
political culture. The question is whether the AKP fuels this phenomenon or merely reflects it.

While the nation has changed – through migration, industrialisation, the spread of education,
democracy and globalisation – in the 85 years since the republic was created, the state has
remained essentially the same: authoritarian, hostile to plurality and observant of Mustafa
Kemal Atatürk’s secular vision for the revolutionary republic he founded. The clash between
the AKP and the secularists embodies this tension. Osman Ulagay, the author of a new book
on the clash between secularism and conservatism in Turkey, says the party represents
something new and unexpected. “The AKP is more socially conservative and traditional and
closer to religious values [than other political parties],” he says. “But it is also more open to
democratic values, to the market economy, to the EU. I don’t think this is what the secularists
had expected.”

Secularism in Turkey – or, more accurately, the French concept of laïcité – mandates not just
the separation of state and religion but also the strict control of religious practice by the state.
Ural Akbulut, rector of Middle East Technical University, argues that without this control, the
alternative to Turkey’s modern secular democracy would be “a radical Islamic dictatorship”.
This explains, he says, “why we [secularists] are so afraid even of mild Islam”. Yet rightly or
wrongly, secularism has come to be seen by many people in the emerging cities of central
Anatolia – Kayseri, Konya, Gaziantep, and others in the AKP’s heartland – solely as
discrimination against women who wear the headscarf. These women are prevented from
attending state universities, becoming civil servants or teaching if they insist on wearing the
scarf. This restriction has become the most contested issue between the AKP and the
secularists since last July, when the party won re-election by a landslide.

The decision that prompted Mr Yalcinkaya to act was the government’s move in February to
lift a ban on the wearing of the headscarf on campus. Mr Erdogan has shown occasional signs
that he regrets this decision, which is being challenged in the constitutional court. But his
choice to pursue it confirmed the suspicions of many Turks, especially among his more liberal
supporters, that he has abandoned his first-term policies of popularly supported, pro-European
reforms in favour of an agenda designed to appeal to his narrowest voter base among religious
conservatives. Mr Yalcinkaya has compiled a 162-page dossier of statements and actions by
AKP politicians, mayors and community leaders to back up his allegation that the party has
become “the centre of anti-secular activities”. Much of the evidence is based on newspaper
clippings and on municipal efforts to make the Koran available to communities or, in one
case, the setting up of a mobile mosque.

Some legal scholars say the evidence is anecdotal and unconvincing. It reinforces the
suspicion that the case is politically motivated and will be considered in political terms by a
court committed to upholding secularism. Ergun Ozbudun, professor of constitutional law at
Bilkent University, says years of being dragged into Turkey’s culture wars have made the
court “a political actor, part of the ideological struggle”. The fact that the judges, in a
unanimous decision, agreed to hear the arguments does not mean they will decide to close the
AKP down. But it might be ominous for Mr Erdogan, who served a brief jail term in 1999 for
subversive Islamist activities.

The court has ordered the closure of more than 20 political parties since Turkey became a
multi-party democracy in the 1940s. Two overtly Islamist predecessors of the AKP were shut
in the 1990s. No petition to the court to close a party has ever been rejected. Turkey has
meanwhile experienced four military coups d’état; one prime minister – Adnan Menderes –
was hanged on the orders of the army. The circumstances in which earlier party closures were
ordered differ from those prevailing today. The Welfare and Virtue parties had little popular
support and less credibility. The AKP, though nominally their successor, has plenty of both. It
won 47 per cent of the vote last July and has a commanding parliamentary majority. It also
has – or had until very recently, at any rate – the backing of a swathe of moderate and liberal
opinion, in addition to the unquestioned support of its socially conservative base. The party
has embraced the market economy. It also has international backing and a pro-European
outlook that has secured for Turkey accession negotiations to join the EU.

These factors should weigh on the court’s deliberations. But the judges’ recent history with
the AKP makes this uncertain. Last May, at a pivotal moment in a crisis over the appointment
of Mr Gul as president, the court handed down a ruling that overturned a parliamentary vote.
The justification for the ruling was a technicality so flimsy that Prof Ozbudun calls it “a legal
scandal”. (The ruling concerned the quorum of MPs required for parliament to elect the
president and was rendered redundant after last July’s election, following which Mr Gul was
elected to the presidency.)

Whether the AKP has the vision and determination to pursue a reformist second term was
open to question even before Mr Yalcinkaya filed his case. Mr Erdogan has been acting since
the election as if he regards the large majority he secured as more of a burden than an
opportunity. “He seems to be paralysed by his 47 per cent,” says Mustafa Aydin, professor of
international relations at TOBB University. True, the prime minister this year announced a
policy agenda that contained more than 100 goals to be achieved in his second term – but
many were minor and there are yet few indications that the government is following through
on them. That is in contrast to a first term that made much progress in reforming the economy
and securing EU entry negotiations.

Amid this loss of momentum comes a growing sense that Turkey’s economic boom is over.
Standard & Poor’s, the credit rating agency, this month reduced its outlook for the country to
negative “owing to the increasingly fraught political and global environment that the country
faces in the near term”. The decision came as a shock to a government that had thought a
rating upgrade was in prospect after a five-year reform record that had seen the economy
expand at 7 per cent a year, with income per head roughly doubled to $7,500. The slowing
economy has highlighted the need for further and deeper structural reforms. The EU is
demanding the amendment, and ideally the abolition, of article 301 of the penal code, which
criminalises certain aspects of free speech. But, fearful of a nationalist backlash, the
government has proposed a cosmetic change to the article that is likely to satisfy neither
progressives nor reactionaries.

Some observers argue that, left to his own devices, Mr Erdogan might have lost the next
election without the need for prosecutorial intervention. “The AKP’s reputation [for broadly
popular reforms] was beginning to falter and it was losing its image as a centre party and
returning to a seemingly narrow core agenda,” says Mr Ulagay, the author. “It was very
unwise for the indictment to interrupt that process.”

SLOVENIA'S PRESIDENT SAYS TURKEY NEEDS CLEAR IDEA OF EU
                        MEMBERSHIP PROSPECTS
                   International Herald Tribune, 23.04.2008

Slovenian President Danilo Turk on Wednesday advocated Turkey's bid to join the European
Union, saying no country can be precluded from EU membership for cultural reasons. Turk
told the European Parliament that Turkey's negotiations with the EU — partially frozen over
Ankara's refusal to trade with EU member Cyprus — must continue. He called on fellow EU
countries to show pragmatism in admitting new countries — although he said any prospective
member must first fulfill all technical criteria. No country "can be precluded from
membership only for reasons of political inconvenience or cultural prejudice," said Turk,
whose country holds the rotating EU presidency until June 30.

Turkey's EU campaign, which is expected to last many years, has already been damaged by
French and German misgivings, a dispute over the divided island of Cyprus, freedom of
speech issues and divisions within the predominantly Muslim nation that have sapped
domestic support for the bid. France takes over from Slovenia as EU president on July 1 and
is likely to cool the enthusiasm for accelerated talks with Ankara. But Turk said the EU needs
Turkey, and a failure to engage Ankara would damage the EU's credibility. "The feeling of
exclusion breeds resentment, and resentment breeds instability. We must think about further
expansion in the light of the EU's ambition to be a leading global player," Turk said. He also
called for faster integration of the Western Balkan countries — although he refused to give a
date to Serbia for the long-awaited signing of a pre-membership agreement — and said
countries on the union's eastern fringe such as Ukraine should also forge closer ties with the
27-nation bloc.

                SARKOZY/UE: CONTRE L'ENTRÉE DE LA TURQUIE
                             Le Figaro, 24.04.2008

"J'ai toujours été opposé à l'entrée de la Turquie dans l'UE, pour une simple et bonne raison :
la Turquie n'est pas en Europe" a déclaré Nicolas Sarkozy. Il a indiqué qu'il "ferait un
référendum" si "la question se posait". En revanche, il s'est dit opposé à "l'automaticité du
référendum", qu'il n'emploierait donc pas pour un élargissement aux Balkans, par exemple.

Expliquant que "c'était une erreur de rendre le référendum automatique", comme l'avait fait
Jacques Chirac pour tout nouvel élargissement de l'UE. "Si demain les Suisses veulent rentrer
en Europe, on ne va pas contester qu'ils sont Européens" et "organiser un référendum", a-t-il
dit. e président s'est en revanche dit favorable à l'élargissement de l'UE aux Balkans, voire à la
Suisse. "Ce n'est pas la même chose de faire entrer en Europe la Croatie" ou la Suisse, a-t-il
estimé.