· Ankara claims Kurdish rebels preparing attacks· Operations could wreck American peace strategy
Simon Tisdall in AnkaraFriday March 23, 2007 / The Guardian
The US is scrambling to head off a "disastrous" Turkish military intervention in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq that threatens to derail the Baghdad security surge and open up a third front in the battle to save Iraq from disintegration.
Senior Bush administration officials have assured Turkey in recent days that US forces will increase efforts to root out Kurdistan Workers' party (PKK) guerrillas enjoying safe haven in the Qandil mountains, on the Iraq-Iran-Turkey border.
But Abdullah Gul, Turkey's foreign minister, MPs, military chiefs and diplomats say up to 3,800 PKK fighters are preparing for attacks in south-east Turkey - and Turkey is ready to hit back if the Americans fail to act. "We will do what we have to do, we will do what is necessary. Nothing is ruled out," Mr Gul said. "I have said to the Americans many times: suppose there is a terrorist organisation in Mexico attacking America. What would you do?... We are hopeful. We have high expectations. But we cannot just wait forever."
Turkish sources said "hot pursuit" special forces operations in Khaftanin and Qanimasi, northern Iraq, were already under way. Murat Karayilan, a PKK leader, said this week that a "mad war" was in prospect unless Ankara backed off.
Fighting between security forces and Kurdish fighters seeking autonomy or independence for Kurdish-dominated areas of south-east Turkey has claimed 37,000 lives since 1984. The last big Turkish operation occurred 10 years ago, when 40,000 troops pushed deep into Iraq. But intervention in the coming weeks would be the first since the US took control of Iraq in 2003 and would risk direct confrontation between Turkish troops and Iraqi Kurdish forces and their US allies.
Several other factors are adding to the tension between the Nato partners:
· The firm Turkish belief that the US is playing a double game in northern Iraq. Officials say the CIA is covertly funding and arming the PKK's sister organisation, the Iran-based Kurdistan Free Life party, to destabilise the Iranian government.
· US acquiescence in plans to hold a referendum in oil-rich Kirkuk in northern Iraq. Turkey suspects Iraqi Kurds are seeking control of Kirkuk as a prelude to the creation of an independent Kurdistan.
· Plans by the US Congress to vote on a resolution blaming Turkey for genocide against the Armenians in 1915. Faruk Logoglu, a former ambassador to Washington, said that if the resolution passed, relations "could take generations to recover".
· Record levels of Turkish anti-Americanism dating back to 2003, when Turkey refused to let US combat forces cross the Iraq border.
The US is already fighting Sunni insurgents and Shia militias. Analysts say a surge in violence in northern Iraq, previously the most stable region, could capsize the entire US plan. But pressure on the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is also growing as a result of forthcoming elections. Military intervention was narrowly avoided last summer when he said that "patience was at an end" over US prevarication. Now conservatives and nationalists are again accusing him of not standing up to Washington.
"If they are killing our soldiers ... and if public pressure on the government increases, of course we will have to intervene," said Ali Riza Alaboyun, an MP for Mr Erdogan's Justice and Development party. "It is the legal right of any country to protect its people and its borders."
US support for Iranian Kurds opposed to the Tehran government is adding to the agitation. "The US is trying to undermine the Iran regime, using the Kurds like it is using the MEK [the anti-Tehran People's Mujahideen]," said Dr Logoglu. "Once you begin to differentiate between 'good' and 'bad' terrorist organisations, then you lose the war on terror." But he warned that military intervention might be ineffective and could be "disastrous" in destabilising the region. A recent national security council assessment also suggested that senior Turkish commanders were cautious about the prospects of success.
Daniel Fried, assistant secretary of state, said last week that the US was acting to assuage Turkish concerns. "We are committed to eliminating the threat of PKK terrorism in northern Iraq," he said.
General Joseph Ralston, the US special envoy dealing with the PKK issue, was less upbeat, admitting that "the potential for Turkish cross-border action" was growing. "We have reached a critical point in which the pressure of continued [PKK] attacks has placed immense public pressure upon the government of Turkey to take some military action. As the snows melt in the mountain passes, we will see if the PKK renews its attacks and how the Turkish government responds ... I hope the Turks will continue to stand by us."
But a Milliyet journalist, Kadri Gursel, said: "The US attitude has really pissed off the government and the army. The US really doesn't understand how exhausted and fed up they are."
Friday, March 23, 2007
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Unease as Erdogan mulls bid for presidency / istanbul-bilbao
The contest to become Turkey's next president moved into a decisive phase yesterday amid evidence of growing unease in secular circles about the possibility that the country's neo-Islamist prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, would seek and win the post.
Mr Erdogan, Turkey's most openly devout Muslim prime minister in 20 years, has not yet said whether he will seek the nomination of his ruling Justice and Development party. His indecision is starting to paralyse the political landscape, overshadowing the more important general election that Turkey must hold by November.
The outgoing president, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, has convened a meeting of the National Security Council for April 10, six days before the formal process of electing a new president begins. According to Murat Yetkin, a columnist for Radikal newspaper, Mr Sezer wants the council, an important policy-setting forum, to discuss the likely impact of Mr Erdogan's presidency on Turkey's secular constitutional system.
Economists at Raymond James Securities in Istanbul said this week the speculation about Mr Erdogan's candidacy had "raised the stakes" in the presidential contest by clouding his party's prospects in the general election. He would almost certainly be elected by parliament if he decided to stand, and would have to stand down as party leader.
The prime minister began talks with senior party figures yesterday. The move coincided with a poll in an anti-government newspaper suggesting that a large majority of the population did not want him to become president. Much of the secular establishment, including the military, is said to be opposed to his candidacy.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
istanbul-bilbao
Mr Erdogan, Turkey's most openly devout Muslim prime minister in 20 years, has not yet said whether he will seek the nomination of his ruling Justice and Development party. His indecision is starting to paralyse the political landscape, overshadowing the more important general election that Turkey must hold by November.
The outgoing president, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, has convened a meeting of the National Security Council for April 10, six days before the formal process of electing a new president begins. According to Murat Yetkin, a columnist for Radikal newspaper, Mr Sezer wants the council, an important policy-setting forum, to discuss the likely impact of Mr Erdogan's presidency on Turkey's secular constitutional system.
Economists at Raymond James Securities in Istanbul said this week the speculation about Mr Erdogan's candidacy had "raised the stakes" in the presidential contest by clouding his party's prospects in the general election. He would almost certainly be elected by parliament if he decided to stand, and would have to stand down as party leader.
The prime minister began talks with senior party figures yesterday. The move coincided with a poll in an anti-government newspaper suggesting that a large majority of the population did not want him to become president. Much of the secular establishment, including the military, is said to be opposed to his candidacy.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
istanbul-bilbao
Turkey chafes at exclusion from EU celebration / istanbul-bilbao
ANKARA: Turkey took a swipe at Germany on Tuesday over a decision to exclude candidate countries from the European Union's 50th birthday celebrations in Berlin next weekend.
"It would have been meaningful, in terms of demonstrating once again the unity of the European family, if Germany had invited candidate countries," the Turkish Foreign Ministry said in a short statement.
Leaders of the 27 member states will attend a gala concert and dinner, street parties and a short summit meeting at which a Berlin Declaration on the bloc's achievements and future is to be signed.
Turkey and Croatia are in negotiations to join the European Union; Macedonia has official candidate status; and other western Balkan states, Serbia, Bosnia and Albania, are waiting in the wings.
But EU enlargement has become unpopular in some older member states, especially in France, where elections are scheduled for his spring, and Austria and Germany.
Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany is opposed to Turkish membership in the EU, though she has also pledged to respect previous agreements between the bloc and Ankara.
Asked about Ankara's statement, a German government spokesman said: "This is a celebration of the members of the European Union. No candidate countries were invited, whether it be Turkey or others."
An EU diplomat in Ankara said the decision was not intended as a snub but reflected the EU's preoccupation with its own internal divisions, including over the wording of the planned anniversary declaration.
Turkey, a relatively poor, overwhelmingly Muslim country of 74 million people, began EU entry talks in October 2005, but faces long and difficult negotiations.
Last December, the EU suspended talks in 8 of 35 "chapters" or policy areas because of Turkey's refusal to open its ports and airports to traffic from Cyprus, an a EU member and a country that Turkey does not recognize.
istanbul-bilbao
"It would have been meaningful, in terms of demonstrating once again the unity of the European family, if Germany had invited candidate countries," the Turkish Foreign Ministry said in a short statement.
Leaders of the 27 member states will attend a gala concert and dinner, street parties and a short summit meeting at which a Berlin Declaration on the bloc's achievements and future is to be signed.
Turkey and Croatia are in negotiations to join the European Union; Macedonia has official candidate status; and other western Balkan states, Serbia, Bosnia and Albania, are waiting in the wings.
But EU enlargement has become unpopular in some older member states, especially in France, where elections are scheduled for his spring, and Austria and Germany.
Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany is opposed to Turkish membership in the EU, though she has also pledged to respect previous agreements between the bloc and Ankara.
Asked about Ankara's statement, a German government spokesman said: "This is a celebration of the members of the European Union. No candidate countries were invited, whether it be Turkey or others."
An EU diplomat in Ankara said the decision was not intended as a snub but reflected the EU's preoccupation with its own internal divisions, including over the wording of the planned anniversary declaration.
Turkey, a relatively poor, overwhelmingly Muslim country of 74 million people, began EU entry talks in October 2005, but faces long and difficult negotiations.
Last December, the EU suspended talks in 8 of 35 "chapters" or policy areas because of Turkey's refusal to open its ports and airports to traffic from Cyprus, an a EU member and a country that Turkey does not recognize.
istanbul-bilbao
Monday, March 19, 2007
A cautious welcome for the gringo / istanbul-bilbao
George Bush's new-found sympathy for social justice in Latin America has prompted a copycat tour from Hugo Chávez
IN THE twilight of George Bush's presidency, the word “surge” has come to mean a belated attempt to make up for past mistakes. That applies to Iraq, but also to Mr Bush's week-long, five-country tour of Latin America, which ended on March 14th. His longest trip to the region seemed designed to correct the impression that the United States is too busy battling terrorists to pay much attention to the struggles of Latin American democracies to overcome poverty and drug-fuelled crime.
Mr Bush did not have much new to offer, except in vocabulary: he talked of “social justice”, and of health, education and aid. He visited markets and Mayan ruins, and ate barbecues and guacamole. Predictably, he was greeted with angry (but mainly small) demonstrations. More importantly, he showed that the United States has partners in the region, even among left-leaning governments.
Mr Bush did not have much new to offer, except in vocabulary: he talked of “social justice”, and of health, education and aid. He visited markets and Mayan ruins, and ate barbecues and guacamole. Predictably, he was greeted with angry (but mainly small) demonstrations. More importantly, he showed that the United States has partners in the region, even among left-leaning governments.
Venezuela's Hugo Chávez did his best to prove the opposite. In a counter-tour which seemingly grew on the hoof to take in a matching, but different, five countries, the populist strongman mocked the American president as a “political corpse” in a Buenos Aires football stadium, denounced the United States as the “most murderous empire in all of history” at a press conference in Port-au-Prince and called capitalism “hell” in a flood-struck town in Bolivia.
In this motorcade joust Mr Bush came out ahead. That is not because the United States is the bigger benefactor but because nowadays its designs in Latin America are less imperial than those of Mr Chávez.
Mr Chávez has one objective: to forge a united anti-American block under his leadership. Mr Bush had several aims. In Brazil, it was ethanol. Aware at last that oil is climate-changing and controlled by unfriendly potentates like Mr Chávez, Mr Bush wants to cut the United States' future petrol consumption by a fifth in ten years. Brazil is already there: 40% of the fuel in Brazilian cars is made from sugar cane.
Mr Bush and Brazil's president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, agreed to promote ethanol production and use across the region, and to co-operate on research. By fixing purity standards, they hope to make ethanol a globally tradable commodity. But Mr Bush refused to talk about the high tariff that protects American corn farmers, whose ethanol is more costly and carbon-emitting to produce than Brazil's.
There was no visible progress on the Doha round of world trade talks, though the American trade representative, Susan Schwab, spent an extra day in São Paulo to talk to Brazilian officials and industrialists. And Lula, somewhat mystifyingly, insisted that “we're going firmly toward finding the so-called G-spot for making a deal.”
Far from the confrontation desired by Mr Chávez, relations between the biggest powers of North and South America are coming to resemble those between the United States and Europe: there is a recognition on both sides that the overall friendship counts for more than any disagreements on detail. Lula is to visit Mr Bush at Camp David on March 31st.
“This level of presidential diplomacy is unheard of,” points out Paulo Sotero, director of the Brazil Institute at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC. “It's very important for Brazilians to be recognised in a special way by the United States vis-à-vis the rest of the continent.”
For Uruguay's leftish president, Tabaré Vázquez, hosting Mr Bush was a tacit message to neighbouring Brazil and Argentina, two of his partners in the Mercosur trade grouping, not to take his small country for granted. Uruguay recently signed a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement with the United States. Mr Vázquez would like that to lead to a free-trade deal, though many in his government, not to mention the United States' Congress, do not.
In this motorcade joust Mr Bush came out ahead. That is not because the United States is the bigger benefactor but because nowadays its designs in Latin America are less imperial than those of Mr Chávez.
Mr Chávez has one objective: to forge a united anti-American block under his leadership. Mr Bush had several aims. In Brazil, it was ethanol. Aware at last that oil is climate-changing and controlled by unfriendly potentates like Mr Chávez, Mr Bush wants to cut the United States' future petrol consumption by a fifth in ten years. Brazil is already there: 40% of the fuel in Brazilian cars is made from sugar cane.
Mr Bush and Brazil's president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, agreed to promote ethanol production and use across the region, and to co-operate on research. By fixing purity standards, they hope to make ethanol a globally tradable commodity. But Mr Bush refused to talk about the high tariff that protects American corn farmers, whose ethanol is more costly and carbon-emitting to produce than Brazil's.
There was no visible progress on the Doha round of world trade talks, though the American trade representative, Susan Schwab, spent an extra day in São Paulo to talk to Brazilian officials and industrialists. And Lula, somewhat mystifyingly, insisted that “we're going firmly toward finding the so-called G-spot for making a deal.”
Far from the confrontation desired by Mr Chávez, relations between the biggest powers of North and South America are coming to resemble those between the United States and Europe: there is a recognition on both sides that the overall friendship counts for more than any disagreements on detail. Lula is to visit Mr Bush at Camp David on March 31st.
“This level of presidential diplomacy is unheard of,” points out Paulo Sotero, director of the Brazil Institute at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC. “It's very important for Brazilians to be recognised in a special way by the United States vis-à-vis the rest of the continent.”
For Uruguay's leftish president, Tabaré Vázquez, hosting Mr Bush was a tacit message to neighbouring Brazil and Argentina, two of his partners in the Mercosur trade grouping, not to take his small country for granted. Uruguay recently signed a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement with the United States. Mr Vázquez would like that to lead to a free-trade deal, though many in his government, not to mention the United States' Congress, do not.
Mr Bush's seven-hour stopover in Bogotá was the first visit by an American president to Colombia's capital since 1982. That was intended to show that American aid to fight the drugs trade and leftist guerrillas, combined with the tough security policies of President Álvaro Uribe, are making the country safer. Even so, 20,000 troops and police were deployed to secure Bogotá's normally tranquil streets.
In Guatemala, the mood was soured by the arrest in Massachusetts this month of hundreds of illegal workers, many of them Guatemalan. Oscar Berger, the president, told Mr Bush that deportations of illegal migrants should end.
Mr Bush said he hoped an immigration reform bill can be approved in the Senate by August. Until then, the American plan to fence out illegal immigrants will cast a shadow over what ought to be a warm friendship between Mr Bush and Felipe Calderón, Mexico's new conservative president. “The United States has a lot to do to regain respect in Latin America,” Mr Calderón bluntly remarked.
Mr Bush tried. He boasted that he had doubled aid to the region, to $1.6 billion. That is only because of an accounting quirk in 2001. The United States has ramped up aid to a few countries, via Plan Colombia, AIDS programmes and the Millennium Challenge Account (for the poorest). But it has cut development aid to a larger group, notes Joy Olson of the Washington Office on Latin America, a left-leaning NGO. Overall, Mr Bush has spent more than his predecessor, Bill Clinton.
Mr Chávez is outspending and out-promising Mr Bush. He said that Venezuela's cheap-oil deals with its neighbours total 200,000 barrels a day (worth perhaps $1.6 billion a year); in addition, he has announced aid totalling some $5.5 billion. Jamaica, added to his tour (along with Haiti) at the last minute, was promised cheap natural gas. Argentina's president, Néstor Kirchner, thanked Mr Chávez for helping “at the most critical moments.”
But most of Mr Chávez's neighbours are not enthusiastic about his leadership nor willing to turn their backs on the United States. Lula's coming trip to Camp David is a sign that Brazil will not be bullied into an anti-American axis. Mr Bush wisely ignored Mr Chávez's taunts. No one will miss the United States' lame duck president more than the Venezuelan.
In Guatemala, the mood was soured by the arrest in Massachusetts this month of hundreds of illegal workers, many of them Guatemalan. Oscar Berger, the president, told Mr Bush that deportations of illegal migrants should end.
Mr Bush said he hoped an immigration reform bill can be approved in the Senate by August. Until then, the American plan to fence out illegal immigrants will cast a shadow over what ought to be a warm friendship between Mr Bush and Felipe Calderón, Mexico's new conservative president. “The United States has a lot to do to regain respect in Latin America,” Mr Calderón bluntly remarked.
Mr Bush tried. He boasted that he had doubled aid to the region, to $1.6 billion. That is only because of an accounting quirk in 2001. The United States has ramped up aid to a few countries, via Plan Colombia, AIDS programmes and the Millennium Challenge Account (for the poorest). But it has cut development aid to a larger group, notes Joy Olson of the Washington Office on Latin America, a left-leaning NGO. Overall, Mr Bush has spent more than his predecessor, Bill Clinton.
Mr Chávez is outspending and out-promising Mr Bush. He said that Venezuela's cheap-oil deals with its neighbours total 200,000 barrels a day (worth perhaps $1.6 billion a year); in addition, he has announced aid totalling some $5.5 billion. Jamaica, added to his tour (along with Haiti) at the last minute, was promised cheap natural gas. Argentina's president, Néstor Kirchner, thanked Mr Chávez for helping “at the most critical moments.”
But most of Mr Chávez's neighbours are not enthusiastic about his leadership nor willing to turn their backs on the United States. Lula's coming trip to Camp David is a sign that Brazil will not be bullied into an anti-American axis. Mr Bush wisely ignored Mr Chávez's taunts. No one will miss the United States' lame duck president more than the Venezuelan.
From The Economist print edition
istanbul-bilbao
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Turkey’s housing sales down in 2006 as prices rise / istanbul-bilbao
Prices in the Turkish housing market surged last year, causing sales to decelerate as a consequence. A recent study using data provided by the Land Registry Office revealed that 1,377,533 properties were sold across Turkey in 2006 while some YTL 38 billion was earned from these sales.
According to the figures, housing sales had increased by 10.16 percent in 2003, 19.5 percent in 2004 and 12 percent in 2005. However, 2006 witnessed a dramatic slowdown with only a 1 percent increase. On the other hand, the revenue pulled in from these sales rose by 14.7 percent, largely thanks to the buoyant prices. Real estate agents claim the 1 percent increase doesn't reflect "real sales," adding that market fluctuations in May and June 2006 caused the market to shrink by 20 percent.
Ankara All Real Estate Agents Chamber (ATEM) Chairman Hacı Ali Taylan opined that the increase in the number of houses sold in 2006 was artificially inflated and could be traced back to two reasons: The first is “sales by arrangement,” in which landowners sell their properties to family members to be able to use lower-interest housing loans for other purposes. The second might be that many properties had been sold the year before, but deed transfers were not completed until 2006. Taylan also claimed the increase in total sales was not because of the increase in prices. “That was because unit values were added per square meter for property taxes. Showing property values higher than the real value to be able to get a higher loan from the bank is another reason,” Taylan said. Meanwhile, the data indicated the most valuable properties in Turkey are in İstanbul. Last year, 188,578 houses were sold in İstanbul, with buyers paying YTL 12.4 billion in total to the sellers. This shows that sales dropped by 8.7 percent compared to 2005 in İstanbul, whereas total sales realized jumped by 30 percent.
The picture in the capital, however, was somehow reversed. In Ankara sales decreased by 5.7 percent and 134,735 units of real estate were sold in 2006. Moreover, the revenue earned from these sales also dropped by more than 32 percent. As a result, landowners in Ankara were able to earn only YTL 3.99 billion from these sales.
In İzmir, the number of properties transacted contracted from 82,494 to 78,028 while the money earned reached YTL 2.4 billion after a slight increase. Antalya, the subject of considerable foreign interest, the number of sales stayed nearly stable, yet there was a drastic decline in revenue. A total of 50,751 units were sold in the city in 2005, dropping to 50,707 in 2006; yet, revenue decreased from YTL 2 billion to YTL 1.7 billion. istanbul-bilbao
http://www.todayszaman.com
According to the figures, housing sales had increased by 10.16 percent in 2003, 19.5 percent in 2004 and 12 percent in 2005. However, 2006 witnessed a dramatic slowdown with only a 1 percent increase. On the other hand, the revenue pulled in from these sales rose by 14.7 percent, largely thanks to the buoyant prices. Real estate agents claim the 1 percent increase doesn't reflect "real sales," adding that market fluctuations in May and June 2006 caused the market to shrink by 20 percent.
Ankara All Real Estate Agents Chamber (ATEM) Chairman Hacı Ali Taylan opined that the increase in the number of houses sold in 2006 was artificially inflated and could be traced back to two reasons: The first is “sales by arrangement,” in which landowners sell their properties to family members to be able to use lower-interest housing loans for other purposes. The second might be that many properties had been sold the year before, but deed transfers were not completed until 2006. Taylan also claimed the increase in total sales was not because of the increase in prices. “That was because unit values were added per square meter for property taxes. Showing property values higher than the real value to be able to get a higher loan from the bank is another reason,” Taylan said. Meanwhile, the data indicated the most valuable properties in Turkey are in İstanbul. Last year, 188,578 houses were sold in İstanbul, with buyers paying YTL 12.4 billion in total to the sellers. This shows that sales dropped by 8.7 percent compared to 2005 in İstanbul, whereas total sales realized jumped by 30 percent.
The picture in the capital, however, was somehow reversed. In Ankara sales decreased by 5.7 percent and 134,735 units of real estate were sold in 2006. Moreover, the revenue earned from these sales also dropped by more than 32 percent. As a result, landowners in Ankara were able to earn only YTL 3.99 billion from these sales.
In İzmir, the number of properties transacted contracted from 82,494 to 78,028 while the money earned reached YTL 2.4 billion after a slight increase. Antalya, the subject of considerable foreign interest, the number of sales stayed nearly stable, yet there was a drastic decline in revenue. A total of 50,751 units were sold in the city in 2005, dropping to 50,707 in 2006; yet, revenue decreased from YTL 2 billion to YTL 1.7 billion. istanbul-bilbao
http://www.todayszaman.com
Monday, March 12, 2007
Turkey adopts EU criteria for Turkish coffee
Turkey's attempts to harmonize with European Union laws for the accession process now include world-renowned Turkish coffee.
Turkish coffee will have to meet certain criteria in order to be eligible as a European export product under a newly issued decree from the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs. The decree sets standards regulating the amount of caffeine and humidity and gives coffee producers one year to comply with the new standards.
Previously, kokoreç -- a popular snack made of grilled lamb intestines -- was cleared for EU takeoff with regulations setting hygienic standards for preparation.
As part of its efforts to set EU standards in the Turkish food sector -- seemingly one of the most challenging areas in the harmonization process -- the Agriculture Ministry has drafted the Coffee and Coffee Products decree. The decree introduces new standards for pest management, the use of agrochemicals, packaging, labeling, transportation, storage, sampling and analyses made during coffee cultivation and processing. Raw and roasted coffee beans, grinded coffee and coffee extract, soluble coffee, instant coffee or instant coffee extract fall under the scope of the decree.
The ministry's draft is based on directive 1999/4/EC of the European Parliament and the Council relating to coffee extracts and chicory extracts, setting standards for hygienic cultivation, processing, storage, delivery and retail of coffee and coffee products.
The draft begins by defining what is considered as coffee. Seeds from Coffea arabica Lyn, Coffea canephora or Coffea robusta, Coffea liberica and similar coffee plant varieties -- picked, defruited, dried and sorted by various methods are defined as coffee in the draft. The draft also defines roasted coffee beans as "raw coffee beans roasted in accordance with standard roasting procedures."
Caffeine amount limited
The decree sets standards coffee as defined in the text should possess. The maximum caffeine content is set at 0.2 percent in coffee based dry matter and decaffeinated raw beans, at 0.1 percent in decaffeinated roasted or ground coffee and at 0.3 percent in soluble coffee extract and in soluble coffee. The minimum amount of caffeine raw beans should contain is 0.8 percent while the maximum amount of humidity allowed is 14 percent.
Raw coffee beans shall possess the right color, taste and aroma typical of the plant and be completely cleaned of dead insects or the remains of rodents. The total maximum rate of rotten, moldy seeds and other substances allowed is 5 percent of the total weight of the sample. The dry matter content soluble in water must be not less than 22 percent by weight in the case of decaffeinated roasted coffee beans and decaffeinated grinded coffee. Names such as Turkish coffee, Espresso or filtered coffee will be allowed for marketing uses and retailing in accordance with the processing method. Ercan Yavuz Ankara
Turkish coffee will have to meet certain criteria in order to be eligible as a European export product under a newly issued decree from the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs. The decree sets standards regulating the amount of caffeine and humidity and gives coffee producers one year to comply with the new standards.
Previously, kokoreç -- a popular snack made of grilled lamb intestines -- was cleared for EU takeoff with regulations setting hygienic standards for preparation.
As part of its efforts to set EU standards in the Turkish food sector -- seemingly one of the most challenging areas in the harmonization process -- the Agriculture Ministry has drafted the Coffee and Coffee Products decree. The decree introduces new standards for pest management, the use of agrochemicals, packaging, labeling, transportation, storage, sampling and analyses made during coffee cultivation and processing. Raw and roasted coffee beans, grinded coffee and coffee extract, soluble coffee, instant coffee or instant coffee extract fall under the scope of the decree.
The ministry's draft is based on directive 1999/4/EC of the European Parliament and the Council relating to coffee extracts and chicory extracts, setting standards for hygienic cultivation, processing, storage, delivery and retail of coffee and coffee products.
The draft begins by defining what is considered as coffee. Seeds from Coffea arabica Lyn, Coffea canephora or Coffea robusta, Coffea liberica and similar coffee plant varieties -- picked, defruited, dried and sorted by various methods are defined as coffee in the draft. The draft also defines roasted coffee beans as "raw coffee beans roasted in accordance with standard roasting procedures."
Caffeine amount limited
The decree sets standards coffee as defined in the text should possess. The maximum caffeine content is set at 0.2 percent in coffee based dry matter and decaffeinated raw beans, at 0.1 percent in decaffeinated roasted or ground coffee and at 0.3 percent in soluble coffee extract and in soluble coffee. The minimum amount of caffeine raw beans should contain is 0.8 percent while the maximum amount of humidity allowed is 14 percent.
Raw coffee beans shall possess the right color, taste and aroma typical of the plant and be completely cleaned of dead insects or the remains of rodents. The total maximum rate of rotten, moldy seeds and other substances allowed is 5 percent of the total weight of the sample. The dry matter content soluble in water must be not less than 22 percent by weight in the case of decaffeinated roasted coffee beans and decaffeinated grinded coffee. Names such as Turkish coffee, Espresso or filtered coffee will be allowed for marketing uses and retailing in accordance with the processing method. Ercan Yavuz Ankara
Sunday, March 11, 2007
‘Blue Eyed Giant’ on the silver screen / istanbul-bilbao
How do you know Nâzım Hikmet? Romantic, communist, a man of struggle, fragile… Anyone who knows about him will probably believe that he possesses maybe not all but at least one of these characteristics.
What everybody hopes to see in "Mavi Gözl Dev," which debuted on Friday, is on which of these identities the movie focuses on. This expectation was in fact the movie's basic problem even before it was completed. It should be admitted that having Biket İlhan as director and Metin Belgin as scenarist raised the expectations of an "ideal Nâzım" result. The movie may not be an entire success in this respect, but at least it comes close. Moreover, the movie does not capture the "human Nâzım," making for a foggy picture and a spineless plot.
Let's admit that Yetkin Dikinciler, playing the part of Nâzım, perfectly portrays the aristocratic creation of the avant-garde poet of Turkish poetry. Dolunay Soysert is also a "Piraye" who includes you in her sorrow every time you look at her. Rıza Sönmez playing Raşid (or Orhan Kemal) and Ferit Kaya as İbrahim Balaban deserve to be remembered for years for their performances. So what leaves the viewer with the feeling that something is missing if the cast is so strong? Simply the ambiguity of the movie. The scenario was rewritten eight times. The structure of the movie is sometimes sacrificed for the sake of agreeing with reality. Writings about Nâzım were so thoroughly researched that there is nothing unnecessary in the movie, but the script is not so timely.
The movie starts with Nâzım's transfer to the Bursa Jail in the beginning of 1941. It features the poet's hunger strike and subsequent amnesty which arose from the campaigns that were started for him in France over his imprisonment between 1941 and 1950. The director didn't neglect to use flashbacks to highlight the process that took Nâzım to jail, however, it is not easy to say that these flashbacks necessarily enrich the movie. The scenario not only portrays the life of the poet in jail, but also the visits by Piraye and the love triangle that arose from the visits of Münevver, the poet's cousin. Still, the viewer expects more than routine jail visits from a movie that features the darkest period of Nâzım. For example, the letters Nâzım wrote in jail could have other functions than being mise en scene. Or the director could know that many viewers would expect to see a scene in which Nâzım alone leans against the wall and cowers. We cannot gain insight into the inner world of the poet. Wouldn't it contribute to the authenticity of the movie if it also featured the time when he could not write poems in jail? For as anyone may say, there is a potential "arabesk of Nâzım" in this country and this movie, at least in the final scene, includes that arabesk approach. Let's not skip that.
Although it is far from meeting the expectations of most of us, "Mavi Gözlü Dev" is tolerable as it is the first movie ever to feature the life of a contemporary Turkish poet. Without expecting a masterpiece, you can watch the story of a poet. The movie leaves the viewer with somber sentiments. Though it may not be clear whether these stem from the life story of Nâzım Hikmet or the movie falling under the mark.
10.03.2007
M. İLHAN ATILGAN İSTANBUL
istanbul-bilbao
What everybody hopes to see in "Mavi Gözl Dev," which debuted on Friday, is on which of these identities the movie focuses on. This expectation was in fact the movie's basic problem even before it was completed. It should be admitted that having Biket İlhan as director and Metin Belgin as scenarist raised the expectations of an "ideal Nâzım" result. The movie may not be an entire success in this respect, but at least it comes close. Moreover, the movie does not capture the "human Nâzım," making for a foggy picture and a spineless plot.
Let's admit that Yetkin Dikinciler, playing the part of Nâzım, perfectly portrays the aristocratic creation of the avant-garde poet of Turkish poetry. Dolunay Soysert is also a "Piraye" who includes you in her sorrow every time you look at her. Rıza Sönmez playing Raşid (or Orhan Kemal) and Ferit Kaya as İbrahim Balaban deserve to be remembered for years for their performances. So what leaves the viewer with the feeling that something is missing if the cast is so strong? Simply the ambiguity of the movie. The scenario was rewritten eight times. The structure of the movie is sometimes sacrificed for the sake of agreeing with reality. Writings about Nâzım were so thoroughly researched that there is nothing unnecessary in the movie, but the script is not so timely.
The movie starts with Nâzım's transfer to the Bursa Jail in the beginning of 1941. It features the poet's hunger strike and subsequent amnesty which arose from the campaigns that were started for him in France over his imprisonment between 1941 and 1950. The director didn't neglect to use flashbacks to highlight the process that took Nâzım to jail, however, it is not easy to say that these flashbacks necessarily enrich the movie. The scenario not only portrays the life of the poet in jail, but also the visits by Piraye and the love triangle that arose from the visits of Münevver, the poet's cousin. Still, the viewer expects more than routine jail visits from a movie that features the darkest period of Nâzım. For example, the letters Nâzım wrote in jail could have other functions than being mise en scene. Or the director could know that many viewers would expect to see a scene in which Nâzım alone leans against the wall and cowers. We cannot gain insight into the inner world of the poet. Wouldn't it contribute to the authenticity of the movie if it also featured the time when he could not write poems in jail? For as anyone may say, there is a potential "arabesk of Nâzım" in this country and this movie, at least in the final scene, includes that arabesk approach. Let's not skip that.
Although it is far from meeting the expectations of most of us, "Mavi Gözlü Dev" is tolerable as it is the first movie ever to feature the life of a contemporary Turkish poet. Without expecting a masterpiece, you can watch the story of a poet. The movie leaves the viewer with somber sentiments. Though it may not be clear whether these stem from the life story of Nâzım Hikmet or the movie falling under the mark.
10.03.2007
M. İLHAN ATILGAN İSTANBUL
istanbul-bilbao
Friday, March 09, 2007
New poll shows Turkish women aren't happy / istanbul-bilbao
Scratch the surface a bit and it emerges that many Turkish women are less than satisfied with their lives. A poll conducted prior to March 8, International Women's Day, revealed a striking level of unhappiness felt by Turkish women.
The poll, carried out by Public Research Center , asked 1,044 rural and city women to share their views on topics such as marriage, family and the status of females in Turkish culture. The picture that emerged was not a pretty one. To the question "Are you happy?" just 42.4 percent of the 1,044 women polled answered "yes," while 31.6 percent answered "no," and 25 percent declined to answer.
A full 64 percent of women polled indicated that their most serious struggles were financial. Within the category of cost of living problems, women also named fatigue, violence, the lack of certain modern house appliances, lack of education, harassment at work or on the street, social discrimination in favor of men, lack of confidence, variety of health problems and economic dependence as other major problems.
Also evident from the results of the poll was that Turkish women had many personal problems. Outside of the cost of living category, women also complained about not being able to live as they wanted, not being able to take a good holiday, having their husbands consort with other women and not feeling beautiful or stylish.
Future not looking so bright
In terms of their thoughts about the future, the outlook of Turkish women also appears grim. When asked whether they were optimistic about the future, 40.6 percent replied "no," while 33.7 percent said "yes."
In another section of the poll, women were asked to share their self image. Asked to define themselves according to three choices given on the poll, 42 percent defined themselves as "problematic," while 26.2 percent defined themselves as "modern and happy." Women who rejected the first two choices were asked by pollsters to define themselves as they wished, leading to some striking answers.
Some of the responses given were: "I am a hard laborer," "I don't know what I am," "I am a slave," "I am a sick, tired and ruined shadow of a person," "I am a servant," "I am a pathetic being on the verge of going mad," "I am a human who is on her feet 15-16 hours a day," "I am an unfortunate woman" and "I am someone who was destroyed by the comfort in her father's home."
Turkish women unhealthy
In addition to the mental state of Turkish women, the poll also brought to light the general health status of Turkish women as being "extremely bad."
To the question of "Can you say 'I am completely healthy?'" 50 percent of the women polled answered "no," 35.6 percent answered "yes," and 14.4 percent didn't know.
Among health problems listed by those polled were aches and pains, gynecological problems, psychological problems, tooth and eye problems, and stomach and intestinal discomfort.
As to the general value accorded to the status of women in Turkish society, 60.2 percent believed women weren't valued in Turkey, 21.6 believed they were and 18.2 percent declined to answer.
In terms of the total number of hours spent working per day, Turkish career women appear to get the short end of the stick: 66.2 percent of housewives in the survey said they worked six to eight hours a day around the house, while working women had heavier labor loads -- 33.3 percent of working women polled said that between work and home duties, they worked 10-12 hours a day. Twenty-seven percent said they worked 13-15 hours a day.
Women were also polled whether or not the marriages they had dreamed of when young had come true, with 32.2 percent answering "no," 30.2 answering "yes," and another 37.6 percent declining to respond.
Some of the general opinions expressed by the poll shed an dark light on their thoughts about marriage and family in modern Turkey. Here is an overview of some of the comments received:
"The family structure has been shaken in Turkey." "There will be more and more divorces." "I am unable to meet the desires of my children." "If I knew what I know now, I would never have gotten married." "There is a fight every day in our home because of money." "I have nothing to wear, I am ashamed." "Why do they say mothers carry heaven on their backs?" "We've been destroyed, what about our daughters?" "Don't you see the disaster that has happened to us?" "High prices and poverty are crushing our spirits." "Our biggest source of entertainment is television, and football is a must," "Equality is only on paper," "I think feminists are right" and "Women everywhere are excluded."
09.03.2007
Today’s Zaman İstanbul
The poll, carried out by Public Research Center , asked 1,044 rural and city women to share their views on topics such as marriage, family and the status of females in Turkish culture. The picture that emerged was not a pretty one. To the question "Are you happy?" just 42.4 percent of the 1,044 women polled answered "yes," while 31.6 percent answered "no," and 25 percent declined to answer.
A full 64 percent of women polled indicated that their most serious struggles were financial. Within the category of cost of living problems, women also named fatigue, violence, the lack of certain modern house appliances, lack of education, harassment at work or on the street, social discrimination in favor of men, lack of confidence, variety of health problems and economic dependence as other major problems.
Also evident from the results of the poll was that Turkish women had many personal problems. Outside of the cost of living category, women also complained about not being able to live as they wanted, not being able to take a good holiday, having their husbands consort with other women and not feeling beautiful or stylish.
Future not looking so bright
In terms of their thoughts about the future, the outlook of Turkish women also appears grim. When asked whether they were optimistic about the future, 40.6 percent replied "no," while 33.7 percent said "yes."
In another section of the poll, women were asked to share their self image. Asked to define themselves according to three choices given on the poll, 42 percent defined themselves as "problematic," while 26.2 percent defined themselves as "modern and happy." Women who rejected the first two choices were asked by pollsters to define themselves as they wished, leading to some striking answers.
Some of the responses given were: "I am a hard laborer," "I don't know what I am," "I am a slave," "I am a sick, tired and ruined shadow of a person," "I am a servant," "I am a pathetic being on the verge of going mad," "I am a human who is on her feet 15-16 hours a day," "I am an unfortunate woman" and "I am someone who was destroyed by the comfort in her father's home."
Turkish women unhealthy
In addition to the mental state of Turkish women, the poll also brought to light the general health status of Turkish women as being "extremely bad."
To the question of "Can you say 'I am completely healthy?'" 50 percent of the women polled answered "no," 35.6 percent answered "yes," and 14.4 percent didn't know.
Among health problems listed by those polled were aches and pains, gynecological problems, psychological problems, tooth and eye problems, and stomach and intestinal discomfort.
As to the general value accorded to the status of women in Turkish society, 60.2 percent believed women weren't valued in Turkey, 21.6 believed they were and 18.2 percent declined to answer.
In terms of the total number of hours spent working per day, Turkish career women appear to get the short end of the stick: 66.2 percent of housewives in the survey said they worked six to eight hours a day around the house, while working women had heavier labor loads -- 33.3 percent of working women polled said that between work and home duties, they worked 10-12 hours a day. Twenty-seven percent said they worked 13-15 hours a day.
Women were also polled whether or not the marriages they had dreamed of when young had come true, with 32.2 percent answering "no," 30.2 answering "yes," and another 37.6 percent declining to respond.
Some of the general opinions expressed by the poll shed an dark light on their thoughts about marriage and family in modern Turkey. Here is an overview of some of the comments received:
"The family structure has been shaken in Turkey." "There will be more and more divorces." "I am unable to meet the desires of my children." "If I knew what I know now, I would never have gotten married." "There is a fight every day in our home because of money." "I have nothing to wear, I am ashamed." "Why do they say mothers carry heaven on their backs?" "We've been destroyed, what about our daughters?" "Don't you see the disaster that has happened to us?" "High prices and poverty are crushing our spirits." "Our biggest source of entertainment is television, and football is a must," "Equality is only on paper," "I think feminists are right" and "Women everywhere are excluded."
09.03.2007
Today’s Zaman İstanbul
Turkish nationalism: Waving Ataturk's flag / istanbul-bilbao
There has been a lethal upsurge in ultra-nationalist feeling in Turkey
SITTING in an office plastered with Ottoman pennants, portraits of Ataturk and the Turkish flag, Kemal Kerincsiz, a lawyer, says his mission in life is to protect the Turkish nation from “Western imperialism and global forces that want to dismember and destroy us”. In the past two years Mr Kerincsiz and his Turkish Jurists' Union have launched a slew of cases against Turkish intellectuals under article 301 of the penal code, which makes “insulting Turkishness” a criminal offence.
Mr Kerincsiz has confined his nationalism to the courts. But elsewhere new ultra-nationalist groups, some of them led by retired army officers, have been vowing over guns and copies of the Koran to make Turks “the masters of the world” and even “to die and kill” in the process. In January one of Mr Kerincsiz's targets, a Turkish-Armenian newspaper editor, Hrant Dink, was shot dead by a 17-year-old, Ogun Samast, because he had “insulted the Turks”. The murder, in broad daylight on one of Istanbul's busiest streets, was a chilling manifestation of a resurgence of xenophobic nationalism aimed at Turkey's non-Muslim minorities and the Kurds—plus their defenders in the liberal elite.
The upsurge threatens to undo the good of four years of reforms by the mildly Islamist government led by Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Indeed, it is partly in response to these reforms—more freedom for the Kurds, a trimming of the army's powers, concessions on Cyprus—that nationalist passions have been roused. The knowledge that many members of the European Union do not want Turkey to join has inflamed them further (the EU partially suspended membership talks with Turkey in December because of its refusal to open its ports and airspace to Greek-Cypriots).
Another factor is America's refusal to move against separatist PKK guerrillas who are based in northern Iraq. If the United States Congress delivers its pledge to adopt a resolution calling the mass slaughter of the Ottoman Armenians in 1915 genocide, Turkey's relationship with its ally would suffer “lasting damage”, says the foreign minister, Abdullah Gul.
Murat Belge, a leftist intellectual who is being hounded by Mr Kerincsiz, sees disturbing similarities between the racist nationalism espoused by the “Young Turks” in the dying days of the Ottoman empire (who ordered the mass slaughter of its Armenian subjects), and the siege mentality gripping Turkey today. The perception, now as then, is that Western powers are pressing for changes to empower their local collaborators (ie, Kurds and non-Muslims), with the aim of breaking up the country. “This social Darwinist mindset that implies it's OK to kill your enemies in order to survive” has been perpetuated through an education system that tells young Turks that “they have no other friend than the Turks,” says Mr Belge. And it has been cynically exploited by politicians and generals alike.
Mr Erdogan and Deniz Baykal, the leader of the opposition Republican People's Party, have proved no exception. When more than 100,000 Turks gathered at Mr Dink's funeral chanting “We are all Armenians”, Mr Erdogan opined that they had gone “too far”. Both he and Mr Baykal have resisted calls to scrap article 301, though there have been hints that it will be amended.
The politicians are keen to court nationalist votes in the run-up to November's parliamentary election. Mr Erdogan also hopes that burnishing his nationalist credentials will help him to coax a blessing from Turkey's hawkish generals for his hopes of succeeding the fiercely secular Ahmet Necdet Sezer as president in May.
Yet a recent outburst by the chief of the general staff, Yasar Buyukanit, suggests otherwise. He declared that Turkey faced more threats to its national security than at any time in its modern history and added that only its “dynamic forces” [ie, the army] could prevent efforts to “partition the country”. These words, uttered during an official trip to America, were widely seen as a direct warning to Mr Erdogan to shelve his presidential ambitions.
Others do not rule out possible collusion between nationalist elements within the army and retired officers who are organising new ultra-nationalist groups (one is said to be training nationalist youths in Trabzon, where Dink's alleged murderers came from). “The real purpose is to sow chaos, to polarise society so they can regain ground [lost with the EU reforms],” argues Belma Akcura, an investigative journalist whose recent book about rogue security forces known as the “deep state” earned her a three-month jail sentence. It would not be surprising if their next target were a nationalist, she adds.
Meanwhile prominent writers and academics, including Mr Belge, continue to be bombarded with death threats. Some are under police protection. Orhan Pamuk, the Nobel prize-winning author whom Mr Kerincsiz took to court over his comments about the persecution of the Armenians and the Kurds, has fled to New York.
Where will matters go from here? This week one court banned access to YouTube after clips calling Ataturk gay appeared on it; and another sentenced a Kurdish politician to six months' jail for giving the PKK leader, Abdullah Ocalan, an honorific Mr. But a private television station also withdrew a popular series, “The Valley of the Wolves”, that glorifies gun-toting nationalists who mow down their mainly Kurdish enemies, after the channel was inundated with calls for the show's axing. The battle for Turkey's soul is not over yet.
Mar 8th 2007 | ISTANBUL AND WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition
SITTING in an office plastered with Ottoman pennants, portraits of Ataturk and the Turkish flag, Kemal Kerincsiz, a lawyer, says his mission in life is to protect the Turkish nation from “Western imperialism and global forces that want to dismember and destroy us”. In the past two years Mr Kerincsiz and his Turkish Jurists' Union have launched a slew of cases against Turkish intellectuals under article 301 of the penal code, which makes “insulting Turkishness” a criminal offence.
Mr Kerincsiz has confined his nationalism to the courts. But elsewhere new ultra-nationalist groups, some of them led by retired army officers, have been vowing over guns and copies of the Koran to make Turks “the masters of the world” and even “to die and kill” in the process. In January one of Mr Kerincsiz's targets, a Turkish-Armenian newspaper editor, Hrant Dink, was shot dead by a 17-year-old, Ogun Samast, because he had “insulted the Turks”. The murder, in broad daylight on one of Istanbul's busiest streets, was a chilling manifestation of a resurgence of xenophobic nationalism aimed at Turkey's non-Muslim minorities and the Kurds—plus their defenders in the liberal elite.
The upsurge threatens to undo the good of four years of reforms by the mildly Islamist government led by Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Indeed, it is partly in response to these reforms—more freedom for the Kurds, a trimming of the army's powers, concessions on Cyprus—that nationalist passions have been roused. The knowledge that many members of the European Union do not want Turkey to join has inflamed them further (the EU partially suspended membership talks with Turkey in December because of its refusal to open its ports and airspace to Greek-Cypriots).
Another factor is America's refusal to move against separatist PKK guerrillas who are based in northern Iraq. If the United States Congress delivers its pledge to adopt a resolution calling the mass slaughter of the Ottoman Armenians in 1915 genocide, Turkey's relationship with its ally would suffer “lasting damage”, says the foreign minister, Abdullah Gul.
Murat Belge, a leftist intellectual who is being hounded by Mr Kerincsiz, sees disturbing similarities between the racist nationalism espoused by the “Young Turks” in the dying days of the Ottoman empire (who ordered the mass slaughter of its Armenian subjects), and the siege mentality gripping Turkey today. The perception, now as then, is that Western powers are pressing for changes to empower their local collaborators (ie, Kurds and non-Muslims), with the aim of breaking up the country. “This social Darwinist mindset that implies it's OK to kill your enemies in order to survive” has been perpetuated through an education system that tells young Turks that “they have no other friend than the Turks,” says Mr Belge. And it has been cynically exploited by politicians and generals alike.
Mr Erdogan and Deniz Baykal, the leader of the opposition Republican People's Party, have proved no exception. When more than 100,000 Turks gathered at Mr Dink's funeral chanting “We are all Armenians”, Mr Erdogan opined that they had gone “too far”. Both he and Mr Baykal have resisted calls to scrap article 301, though there have been hints that it will be amended.
The politicians are keen to court nationalist votes in the run-up to November's parliamentary election. Mr Erdogan also hopes that burnishing his nationalist credentials will help him to coax a blessing from Turkey's hawkish generals for his hopes of succeeding the fiercely secular Ahmet Necdet Sezer as president in May.
Yet a recent outburst by the chief of the general staff, Yasar Buyukanit, suggests otherwise. He declared that Turkey faced more threats to its national security than at any time in its modern history and added that only its “dynamic forces” [ie, the army] could prevent efforts to “partition the country”. These words, uttered during an official trip to America, were widely seen as a direct warning to Mr Erdogan to shelve his presidential ambitions.
Others do not rule out possible collusion between nationalist elements within the army and retired officers who are organising new ultra-nationalist groups (one is said to be training nationalist youths in Trabzon, where Dink's alleged murderers came from). “The real purpose is to sow chaos, to polarise society so they can regain ground [lost with the EU reforms],” argues Belma Akcura, an investigative journalist whose recent book about rogue security forces known as the “deep state” earned her a three-month jail sentence. It would not be surprising if their next target were a nationalist, she adds.
Meanwhile prominent writers and academics, including Mr Belge, continue to be bombarded with death threats. Some are under police protection. Orhan Pamuk, the Nobel prize-winning author whom Mr Kerincsiz took to court over his comments about the persecution of the Armenians and the Kurds, has fled to New York.
Where will matters go from here? This week one court banned access to YouTube after clips calling Ataturk gay appeared on it; and another sentenced a Kurdish politician to six months' jail for giving the PKK leader, Abdullah Ocalan, an honorific Mr. But a private television station also withdrew a popular series, “The Valley of the Wolves”, that glorifies gun-toting nationalists who mow down their mainly Kurdish enemies, after the channel was inundated with calls for the show's axing. The battle for Turkey's soul is not over yet.
Mar 8th 2007 | ISTANBUL AND WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)