Turkey's commitment to European values questioned

Editor's note: Theo Sommer is a German newspaper editor and intellectual. He has been at Die Zeit since 1958, rising to Editor-in-Chief and Publisher. He is considered one of Germany's foremost authorities on international relations and strategic issues.  The opinions expressed in this commentary below are solely his.

There is No Place in the European Union for This Turkey

HAMBURG - For 10 years, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan built his reputation as a moderate, successful, even exemplary levelheaded Islamist democrat. During his leadership the economy flourished, domestic political stability settled in after a period of shaky coalitions, and the army was put on a leash. When the Arab Spring uprisings began, Turkey's democracy seemed like a shining beacon for the people taking to the streets in the Arab world's crisis crescent.

Those days are over. The economy is stuck in a deep crisis. Share prices and the Turkish lira have slumped. And the AKP, Erdogan's party, has been caught up in a serious corruption scandal. The accused include the sons of three AKP ministers and Erdogan's own son Bilal. Investigators have uncovered millions of dollars stuffed into shoe boxes, money transfers to Iran and construction permits in return for large bribes.

As the crisis has unfolded, Erdogan himself has become more and more autocratic, trying to sweep aside everything standing in his way. Last summer, his security forces launched a bloody crackdown on the protests in and around Gezi Park. Since mid-December, he has ruthlessly pursued all those who would drain the swamp of corruption. Hundreds of police officers, dozens of prosecutors and judges have been fired or transferred because they refused to halt their probes, which had reached the prime minister's inner circle. To put an end to corruption rumors circulating online, Erdogan's government recently blocked access to Twitter and YouTube in Turkey.

Meanwhile, a bitter feud between Erdogan and his ally-turned-rival Fethullah Gülen, has shaken Turkey's political scene. The prime minister rails against the imam, who lives in U.S. exile. He sees enemies and conspirators everywhere.

Turkey's municipal elections held in late March were ultimately about whether the country's awakening civil society or conservatism would prevail. The outcome -- 45 percent for the AKP, 38 percent for the opposition -- demonstrates that Erdogan's power base has not crumbled. Now it's completely up to him whether to run for the presidency in the summer or to disregard the term limits he himself instigated and seek a fourth term as premier.

For 30 years, I have advocated accepting Turkey into the European Union, once the country has fulfilled the Copenhagen Criteria: institutional stability as a guarantee of democracy, the rule of law, respect for human rights and minority rights, a functioning market economy, and finally the pledge to embrace the goals of the political, economic and monetary union.

If Erdogan continues as he has over the past two years, he will not fulfill these criteria. There is no place in the European Union for this Turkey.

The conduct of Turkey -- a NATO member -- in the Syria crisis is also worrying. A leaked audio recording that has gone viral online reveals Turkey's foreign minister, intelligence chief and deputy chief of staff discussing intervening militarily in Syria after staging a fake attack made to look as if it had been committed by Syrians.

The leaders in Ankara need to be clear that Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty requires NATO-wide action only if a member state is actually attacked. If the Turkish government feels like playing with fire on the sidelines of the Syrian civil war, it can do so without expecting NATO assistance. And Germany should promptly withdraw its Patriot missile batteries that are guarding Turkey's frontier with Syria.

This article appeared in The German Weekly on April 4, 2014.

The First Forcible Change in European Borders Since World War II... Uh...NYET!

Forgotten Cyprus

Take a look at the warped media, here, from the Financial Times describing the Crimean referendum as a "divorce at gunpoint".  Okay.  So it's not a "peaceful and consensual" referendum akin to the one that will happen in Scotland, it says.  Alright.  "Instead, it is a figleaf for a forced territorial annexation – the first on the European landmass since the end of the Second World War."  That media talking point quote is a little different from what was previously their go-to line which was this quote: "the first forcible change in European borders since World War Two".  

The media is spreading misinformation.  They are talking as if there was no Turkish invasion of Cyprus, no occupation, no alteration of the island's identity by importing Turkish settlers, and no ethnic-cleansing. Nooo, it was all a bad dream.  I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone... Do di do doo, do di do doo ♪ 

Speaking of going to war on trumped up pre-text...Here's Johnny! Just a few days ago, Turkish officials planned false-flag attacks to create pretext for war with its middle eastern neighbor.  I'm shocked!  Really... Honestly.  I truly am!

Angelina... hello (tap, tap) is this thing on?! Testing, one two...Hey, Angelina Jolie, come to Cyprus and urge action against the use of sexual violence as a war weapon!  How was this acceptable behavior?!

It seems now the West is looking to wean itself from Russian natural gas and one possible place they are looking is Cyprus and the natural resources located off its southern shores.  Europe is speaking with one voice right now regarding the unity of Ukraine.  What are the chances we see that same unity once the "urgent" upcoming Cyprus settlement talks begin?  Let us see what kind of demands they expect from the victim THIS time around.

Somebody wake me up... What a nightmare!

Hurriyet: Why the Turkish military bombed mosques in Cyprus

Article Below is From The Turkish Hurriyet Daily News
By MUSTAFA AKYOL Dated 9/28/2010 12:00:00 AM

We just learned that our officers bombed mosques in Cyprus to 'raise resistance' against 'enemies without.' We now wonder whether they used similar techniques also against 'enemies within'?

Last week, Sabri Yirmibeşoğlu, a retired Turkish general, said something that shocked the nation. During an interview by Habertürk, a popular news channel, he said that the Turkish military had bombed mosques in Cyprus in the past and put the blame on the Greeks. “Such attacks and sabotages on sacred values are done and portrayed as if the enemy did them,” he explained. “The purpose is to raise the resistance of the people.”

The 82-year-old Yirmibeşoğlu was probably not aware of the possible impact of this revelation, which he made just in passing, as if it were a trivial detail. But since then, the media has hotly debated what the bombed mosque story really is, and what it tells us about the amazing adventures of our military.

[HH]Manufacturing contempt

As Yıldıray Oğur, a columnist in daily Taraf, wrote, the operation the ex-general refers to is probably the bombings of the Bayraktar and Ömeriye mosques in Nicosia on the night of March 24, 1962. The incident, naturally, inflamed Cypriot Turks, who organized demonstrations against the Greeks of the island, who they thought were responsible. (Their “resistance,” in other words, was “raised.”)

A few weeks later, though, a local newspaper run by two Cypriot Turks, Ahmet Muzaffer Gürkan, 38, and Ayhan Hikmet, 35, wrote that the bombings had not been done by Greeks at all. And, lo and behold, these two men were both assassinated on that very same night, on April 23, 1962. (Perhaps we need another talkative ex-general to fully shed light on that part of the story.)

Now, all this, of course, is deeply troubling. It shows that the Turkish military intentionally increased tension between the Turks and Greeks of Cyprus, paving the way for more tragic events in the years to come and the partial occupation of the island by Turkey in 1974. Since then, as you would know, Cyprus has been one of the world’s unsolved problems.

To be sure, this should not mean that only the Turkish side was responsible for the intra-communal violence in Cyprus. The nationalists on the Greek side, organized under the infamous EOKA, or National Organization of Cypriot Fighters, were fanatic and violent, and they killed many innocent Turks. (Who knows, perhaps they had their little tricks to “raise resistance” on their side as well.)

Today, what matters more to me as a Turk is the bitter fact that our military has seen it legitimate to commit false flag terror operations to manipulate the psychology our people. This raises troubling questions:

- If they have done this in Cyprus, have they also done similar things at home?

- If they have bombed places to “raise resistance” against “enemies without,” have they also used similar techniques against “enemies within”?

I don’t want be paranoid. That’s why I often don’t agree with some of my liberal friends who see the fingerprints of the “deep state” in almost every political assassination and social turmoil in recent history. I rather believe that evil is “banal,” and horrible things can happen spontaneously without the need for a “master evildoer.”

But some episodes in our recent history are indeed too suspicious, and Gen. Yirmibeşoğlu’s revelation only makes them more so. Take the Ergenekon case. This controversial trial has many details, but two of its allegations are crucial: that the two terrorist acts in 2006, the bombing of ultra-secularist daily Cumhuriyet (which killed nobody) and the shooting of a secularist judge, were false flag operations to put the blame on “the Islamists.”

These two attacks certainly “raised resistance” among the country’s secular-minded masses against the Justice and Development Party, or AKP, government, which the Ergenekon folks clearly wanted to overthrow. So, if these two acts were “operations” of the type that Gen. Yirmibeşoğlu spoke about, than we should grant that they were successful ones. Otherwise, they were just extremely lucky coincidences. I now find the first option even more credible.

[HH]Internal affairs

Now, let me briefly touch upon something else: My column neighbor Burak Bekdil, with whom I often disagree, has written about me again. This time, he proposed a “sociological experiment” which he and I would join together to measure whether secular or religious Turks are more liberal-minded people — by going to their neighborhoods and saying things that will offend them.

But that proposal, as fun as it may be, misses my point. I did not say, “Religious Turks are more tolerant to insult than secular ones.” (And even if I did, Mr. Bekdil should have added an “insulting Atatürk” line to his experiment, to make it fair.)

I just argued that the link between secularism and political liberalism, which many Westerners take for granted, doesn’t exist in Turkey. Here, secularism rather goes hand in hand with nationalism, whereas liberal ideas are increasingly popular among religious conservatives. If Mr. Bekdil wants to test that hypothesis with an experiment, he just can try some of his ultra-secularist friends and simply ask, “Why do you loathe both the conservatives and the liberals so much?”