PES Heyetiyle Görüşme – Türkiye-AB İlişkileri (İng.)

CHP Genel Başkan Yardımcısı Onur Öymen’in PES Heyetiyle görüşmesi
31 Ekim 2006

We are crossing an interesting period at this moment in our immediate neighborhood. We have serious conflicts, a civil war in Iraq, which worries us a lot. In Afghanistan the things are going from bad to worse. In Lebanon the peace is very critical, to what dissent it will hold, how long it will long, we don’t know. So we are living in a difficult security environment. Iran may create further tension in the area. So in all these complicated area, Turkey should be seen as an island of stability, peace and democracy. We are the only NATO country in this region among the candidate countries to the EU. So we believe that, besides our national security interests, we also represent our common security interest and political interests as well.

In our relations with the EU, last year this time we started the enlargement talks but so far the progress made in our process of membership is rather limited. The pace is relatively slow partially because the reform process in Turkey has slowed down and we have criticized the government for not speeding up these reforms. But there are also problems from the EU side. The rejection of the European Constitution has created a real difficulty; for the future of Europe, we need to see the future of this text, whether they will be compromise or not. It may affect the enlargement process of the EU. In Cyprus we are very much in favor of a settlement but a settlement requires virtual concessions from both sides. We believe that by mixing up our relations with EU, with the Cyprus problem, this may damage the Turkish-EU relations and make difficult the solution of Cyprus issue. This is the general situation but I would suggest in this critical position that Turkey and the EU should have a better dialog and language used about each other. By threatening Turkey, the EU only gives damage to the relations. Therefore we believe we need a more mature dialog. But because of their internal problems, some European states want to delay our membership, and for this they look for justifications. I believe that our relations may really suffer. This is our main massage.

The train clash is not our image. In case of a clash both trains will be damaged. We are running on parallel line. Why should we damage each others’ interests? I do not see any reason for a clash between the EU and Turkey. The only reason of confrontation is that there are some excessive demands from Turkey, which have nothing to do with the requirements made to other applicant countries. The only reason is that some countries would like to profit from Turkish candidature to solve their own problems. I think these clash images are extremely artificial. Some European leaders never support the full membership of Turkey, instead they want special status. Many French people do not want to see a big country in the EU as a competitor. They do not want to share real power in the EU. Many countries have told us that they have no problem with small countries because they easily digest them but Turkey is different. They consider Turkey as a competitor. We will not be a smaller country in the future to please some of our European friends. In Germany many times we heard cultural differences matter very much. We wonder why because Adenauer was a strong supporter of Turkey.

Today, how Greek Cyprus joined EU is very simple: the Prime Minister of south Cyprus said if you do not take us as the whole island as a member we veto the membership of Poland and some other countries. They became a member and now EU tells us we need to recognize it. This is unfair. Annan Plan was reestablishing a mixed island, a mixed government. Although there were some shortcomings of this plan, Greek Cyprus said no. If they would said yes, there would be no problem. We still have embargos on the Turkish side, they are not able to make trade, cultural exchanges etc. It is unique in the world. There is not such embargos in anywhere else. The Greek side tries to impose themselves as the only government of Cyprus. EU by accepting them as a full member they gave legitimacy to this illegitimate government. This is the story. What we did in Cyprus is legal and legitimate according to Zurich agreement. We are ready for a negotiated settlement based on equality of both side. In case of mutual concessions there will be a solution whereas one side approach is wrong. This is not compatible with European values such as equality, justice etc. This is not legal. Legality comes from agreements. Turkey should not be seen as a weak country ready to accept all unfair expectations to please EU or someone else. You have to treat Turkey as a serious country. Our aim is to join the EU. Some members are reluctant to see Turkey as a full member because of their own internal problems. To join EU we need all votes of members.

Article 301 is not an obstacle in front of the freedom of speech. It rejects the insult. We need a basic judicial reform not to change the laws but we need to change the mentality. We need to de-politicize the judiciary. The abolishing of articles one by one is not a solution. You have to eliminate the political influences. What we suggest is more fundamental reform. There is no end of their desires. The end will be a basic reform. It is exactly what we need. Last year the support of Turkish population was 75 % but now it decreased to almost %34 . Not only excessive pressure but also the unfriendly language created this decline. We are the main opposition party but there is no single reference in reports of EU what we think about all these issues. We are a democratic society. You cannot overlook the opposition party. But they never ever put our views. They reflect the ideas of small groups, which do not have even % 1 of vote. They never come to us. If you have a problem regarding human rights before going to European Court of Human Rights you need to go your own internal courts. You do not talk to your politicians but instead go to Brussels and pressure Turkey. Is it normal? It is very unfair. We respect Orhan Pamuk although we do not agree with him. In democratic societies you cannot force people to think as you think. He was not sentenced in Turkey.

What French parliament did is the abolishment of freedom of speech. If you say there is no genocide you will be trailed. If there is not a court decision about genocide you cannot legally talk about the presence of genocide. There is no court decision regarding Armenian genocide or something else. We invited all historians to come to Turkey and make research and we said we can open our archives but Armenians do not do such a thing.