Tweet
BAðýþ: BARZANI SHOULD 'DO HIS HOMEWORK FIRST'
Yonca Poyraz DoÐan
Today's Zaman, Turkey
March 19 2007
The Turkish prime minister's foreign policy advisor has said if
Iraq's leader of the regional administration deals with the separatist
terrorist PKK members in his territory and delivers them to Turkish
justice, then warmer relations might be possible.
AK Party deputy Egemen Baðýþ said Massoud Barzani, the leader of
Iraq's autonomous region, should do his homework. "If he cannot
exercise any control in the northern part of Iraq, then he should
not consider himself the leader of that part of Iraq," Baðýþ said.
After Barzani called on Turkey for face-to-face talks to end
high-running tensions over Kurdish terrorists based in northern Iraq,
the question of whether or not Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdoðan will have direct talks with him came to the fore.
Baðýþ said in order to protect Turkey's national interests and the
peace around Turkey, Turkey will talk to anyone, but Barzani should
first capture PKK terrorists and deliver them to Turkey to expect
such a rapprochement from Turkey.
In our "Monday Talk," Baðýþ spoke more about PKK terrorism and Iraq,
plus Turkish-American relations in regards to the Armenian genocide
resolution pending in the US Congress.
How would you explain the importance of the disputed Armenian genocide
resolution for Turkey in terms of Turkish-American relations?
This is a very sensitive issue. Turkey and the US have numerous mutual
projects going on in many different areas. We have common interests in
terms of energy resources and their distribution channels. We have also
common interests in the Middle East peace project. We have common goals
toward bringing more democracy and filtering it through the Middle
East. We have common goals in the Balkans, Caucasus and the Black Sea
regions. We have a common approach toward solving the Cyprus issue,
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and so forth. And we have $11 billion
worth of trade, but more importantly 80 percent of the logistical
goods that US troops use in Iraq go through Turkey. Sixty percent are
Turkish-made. Turkey is the second country with the highest casualties
in Iraq after the US. Although we don't have any troops in Iraq,
Turkish truck drivers, engineers, construction workers and contractors
lost their lives, about 150, in the efforts to rebuild Iraq. So when
you have so many joint projects going, insulting the Turkish nation
with a genocide that their ancestry did not commit would be hard to
digest. We will not be able to explain this to Turkish public opinion.
What do you mean exactly?
Unfortunately, because of the pictures coming from the war in Iraq,
from Fallujah, from Abu Ghraib prison, Turkish public support for US
foreign policy according to the German-Marshall Fund study is down to 7
percent. In the IRI's [International Republican Institute] latest poll,
the number one threat to Turkey, according to those who participated,
is the president of the US. Adding the genocide allegation on top of
the current bad situation, it would be like adding insult to injury. It
would make things much more complicated.
It would put the government into an awkward situation. Not only because
it will hurt our personal feelings as members of the government, but it
will also have a binding effect on us because it is a democracy that we
live in. In democracies, governments cannot ignore public opinion. At
a time when public reaction is so strong, the Turkish government will
have to take measures that will in a way represent the aspirations
of the nation that has brought us to govern them. So we are hoping
that those lawmakers in the US understand the implications of this
resolution, which they think is a local issue and has no binding on
Turkey, but it is more than that. It can really inflict long-lasting
damage to the relationship. Explaining the issue directly to the US
decision makers has an effect.
So you say maintaining a direct dialogue has been helping.
Yes. Recently I was in Brussels along with other members of the
Turkish Parliament for the NATO parliamentary assembly meeting,
and there was a US delegation. It was a meeting that took place for
three days. On the first day, when we told them about the Armenian
issue, they didn't take it seriously. They said this is just a simple
non-binding resolution. They said, 'Why are you making a big deal
out of it?' But by the third day, when we explained to them that this
can have implications, all the congressmen were saying, 'As soon as
we go back, we'll meet with [House] Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi, and we
will ask her to revisit the issue and change her opinion.' So talking
and explaining does matter. That is why Foreign Minister [Abdullah]
Gul's visit to Washington was very important. Both his visit and Gen.
[Yaþar] Buyukanýt's visit were influential in sharing with their
counterparts what the sensitivities of the Turkish government are,
both at the civilian and military levels. And I am sure that they
have conveyed the message to the fullest.
What do you think will happen in the end?
I am optimistic. I don't expect this resolution to pass. I always
say the American lawmakers are smarter than that, and they are not
going to make the historic mistake of passing this resolution.
What would you say about the Democrats in Congress, now they are
in majority?
That is one of the complications. The Democrats have taken the
leadership of both the House and the Senate after a 14-year gap. So
for the last 14 years, the Democrats didn't have much international
sensitivity because the Republicans had to deal with international
issues. So for the Democrats, it is just a local issue to please
their Armenian constituency, but now that they are in and are hoping
to run for leader of the free world in two years' time, they have to
learn very quickly the importance of the international sensitivities
and their implications. That's why I think they will, in the end,
do the right thing.
How would the resolution in Congress affect the relationship between
Turkey and Armenia?
Passing resolutions of this sort is just going to make things more
complicated in terms of having rapprochement between Turkey and
Armenia. The prime minister has made a call to the Armenian government
through independent committees of historians and scholars for opening
archives and also inviting scholars from third countries to contribute
with their own archives. But the Armenian government has rejected
the prime minister's call. Erdoðan was the first Turkish politician
ever to say 'I am ready to face my own history if the Armenians are
ready to face their own history,' but I guess the Armenian leadership
wasn't ready.
Is there a chance for dialogue?
There are approximately 40,000 Armenians from Armenia in Turkey. I am
not talking about Armenians of Turkey, who have found themselves a safe
haven in Turkey. I am talking about the ones who are here as illegal
immigrants, and they are mostly nannies taking care of children. So
if there was any sort of hatred in the hearts of the Turkish people,
they would not trust these Armenian nannies with the most valuable
members of their families, their children. This, by itself, shows
that there is an opportunity for dialogue between the two nations.
Nowadays, the future of relations with Iraqi leaders, especially the
Kurdish Iraqi leaders, in light of PKK terrorism, is dominating the
Turkish media. Is the Turkish prime minister considering starting a
dialogue with the Iraqi Kurdish leaders?
A lot of people are confused about the Iraqi Kurdish leaders. The
president of Iraq happens to be a Kurdish gentleman, Mr. Talabani. He
is the president of all of Iraq. So his natural counterpart is our
president, Ahmed Necdet Sezer. Mr. Sezer has the option of talking
with him. Our prime minister's counterpart is the Iraqi Prime Minister
Nuri el Maliki, with whom he has a very open dialogue. If needed,
he [Erdoðan] can talk to Mr. Talabani and he has actually talked
to Mr. Talabani. When Mr. Talabani got sick, Prime Minister Erdoðan
called him and wished him well. One should not confuse Talabani with
Barzani. Barzani is the leader of a regional administration within
the larger concept of Iraq, and his counterparts are obvious. He can
meet with the local representatives of Turkey or with his counterparts
in Turkish foreign affairs, and so forth. So let's not confuse one
from another. In order to protect Turkey's national interests and
the peace around Turkey, Turkey will talk to anyone.
So do you think that Mr. Erdoðan would talk with Barzani?
Before coming to Mr. Erdoðan, there are many other levels that Mr.
Barzani should first contact and show his good will before he has
a chance to talk. Yes, Mr. Barzani has been received at the White
House, where he met with the US president because of the good will he
has demonstrated to the United States. If he shows good will [toward
Turkey], deals with the PKK, captures all members of the PKK in his
territory and delivers them to Turkish justice, then we will consider
at what level he will be received here in Turkey. But it is too soon
to consider that. First, he has to do his homework. He has to work on
initiatives to start a better relationship with Turkey. But different
levels of our government have been in touch with him in the past,
and will be in touch with him in the future as well, depending on
Turkey's national interests and requirements. In the end, no option
is off the table. Turkey has lost more than 30,000 lives because of
PKK terrorism. So nobody should expect us to forget or ignore that.
In his statements, we hear that he has no control over PKK members
in northern Iraq...
If he cannot have any control in the northern part of Iraq, then he
should not consider himself as the leader of that part of Iraq.
About the support from the United States to eliminate the PKK threat,
there is a lot of skepticism in Turkey. Is there any improvement in
that regard?
Historically, the United States was the first ally of Turkey
to declare PKK as a terrorist organization. The US helped us to
convince most of our European allies to regard PKK as a terrorist
organization. The US helped us to capture the leader of that bloody
organization, who had found himself a safe haven at the Greek Embassy
in Kenya. The US has been one of the supporters in trying to hinder
the financial capabilities of PKK in Europe. Also the US helped us
to provide documentation to Danish authorities that ROJ TV is linked
to the PKK. So traditionally and historically the US has been one
of our staunchest supporters in fighting PKK terrorism. But since
the war in Iraq started, because of the sensitivities in central and
southern Iraq, the US troops have been mostly deployed in those areas,
rather than the north. And as the north has been a quiet part of Iraq,
the US feels hesitant in terms of doing anything that can change the
environment there. But the fact that both governments have appointed
high-level representatives to counter PKK terrorism is an indication
that there is a will to deal with this issue.
Then, why do you think there is so much skepticism when it comes to
the US helping Turkey in that regard?
Because Turkish public opinion is sick and tired of seeing more and
more casualties because of the PKK. The PKK members who have found
themselves safe haven in northern part of Iraq, they infiltrate into
Turkey, they place mines and mobile-phone remote-controlled bombs,
they explode them and cause casualties. That is why the Turkish people
are naturally angry and they want our allies to do something about
it. They want to see some real action taken against the PKK.
And there is nothing more natural than that.
Do you think Turkish and US policies toward Iran have been a match?
As of now, there is no match in terms of having a similar dialogue. I
hope the US will have more dialogue with Iran. Turkey and Iran have
been neighbors for ages and we will continue to have that kind of
relationship. The two nations had the concept of their own states
more than a thousand years. So both nations have a deep understanding
of statehood, both nations have experiences in dealing with each
other. The oldest border between any two countries in the world is
the border between Turkey and Iran. Last year, we've had more than
$6 billion worth of trade with Iran. This is a significant figure.
Having said all that, I must add the belief in Iran's right to conduct
nuclear research for energy purposes, for humanitarian purposes. Of
course, we would not want to see any of the countries in our region
have nuclear weapons. That would be a threat to our nation as well. We
would not want to see nuclear weapons in any countries in the Middle
East. We would not want, as a matter of fact, nuclear weapons in any
country in the world. And we could encourage our neighbors, including
the Iranians, not to work to make nuclear weapons. And in our talks
with our Iranian friends, we always told them to cooperate with the
international atomic agency, to be more transparent and to cooperate
with the rest of the world.
------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------
Egemen Baðýþ
Elected to the Turkish Parliament in November 2002 from the Justice
and Development Party (AK Party), Egemen Baðýþ represents Ýstanbul.
He is also foreign policy advisor to the prime minister.
An active member of the Turkish-American community within the US, Baðýþ
was president of the Federation of Turkish-American Associations, the
New York-based umbrella organization of Turkish-Americans. To date,
he is the only president who has been elected by unanimous vote for
two consecutive terms. He also served as a member of the Advisory
Board on Turkish Citizens Abroad, a government body.
His other titles include chairman of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly
Subcommittee on Transatlantic Relations, the Turkish delegation's
deputy chairman to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, chairman of the
Turkish Parliament's Turkey-US Inter-Parliamentary Friendship Caucus
(a counterpart organization to the Turkey caucus in the US Congress).
Baðýþ was born in the eastern Turkish city of Bingol. His family
hails from the neighboring province of Siirt, where his father had
served as mayor.
--Boundary_(ID_Uu1bQUdDiZrt45UI1JnCMw)--
Yonca Poyraz DoÐan
Today's Zaman, Turkey
March 19 2007
The Turkish prime minister's foreign policy advisor has said if
Iraq's leader of the regional administration deals with the separatist
terrorist PKK members in his territory and delivers them to Turkish
justice, then warmer relations might be possible.
AK Party deputy Egemen Baðýþ said Massoud Barzani, the leader of
Iraq's autonomous region, should do his homework. "If he cannot
exercise any control in the northern part of Iraq, then he should
not consider himself the leader of that part of Iraq," Baðýþ said.
After Barzani called on Turkey for face-to-face talks to end
high-running tensions over Kurdish terrorists based in northern Iraq,
the question of whether or not Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdoðan will have direct talks with him came to the fore.
Baðýþ said in order to protect Turkey's national interests and the
peace around Turkey, Turkey will talk to anyone, but Barzani should
first capture PKK terrorists and deliver them to Turkey to expect
such a rapprochement from Turkey.
In our "Monday Talk," Baðýþ spoke more about PKK terrorism and Iraq,
plus Turkish-American relations in regards to the Armenian genocide
resolution pending in the US Congress.
How would you explain the importance of the disputed Armenian genocide
resolution for Turkey in terms of Turkish-American relations?
This is a very sensitive issue. Turkey and the US have numerous mutual
projects going on in many different areas. We have common interests in
terms of energy resources and their distribution channels. We have also
common interests in the Middle East peace project. We have common goals
toward bringing more democracy and filtering it through the Middle
East. We have common goals in the Balkans, Caucasus and the Black Sea
regions. We have a common approach toward solving the Cyprus issue,
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and so forth. And we have $11 billion
worth of trade, but more importantly 80 percent of the logistical
goods that US troops use in Iraq go through Turkey. Sixty percent are
Turkish-made. Turkey is the second country with the highest casualties
in Iraq after the US. Although we don't have any troops in Iraq,
Turkish truck drivers, engineers, construction workers and contractors
lost their lives, about 150, in the efforts to rebuild Iraq. So when
you have so many joint projects going, insulting the Turkish nation
with a genocide that their ancestry did not commit would be hard to
digest. We will not be able to explain this to Turkish public opinion.
What do you mean exactly?
Unfortunately, because of the pictures coming from the war in Iraq,
from Fallujah, from Abu Ghraib prison, Turkish public support for US
foreign policy according to the German-Marshall Fund study is down to 7
percent. In the IRI's [International Republican Institute] latest poll,
the number one threat to Turkey, according to those who participated,
is the president of the US. Adding the genocide allegation on top of
the current bad situation, it would be like adding insult to injury. It
would make things much more complicated.
It would put the government into an awkward situation. Not only because
it will hurt our personal feelings as members of the government, but it
will also have a binding effect on us because it is a democracy that we
live in. In democracies, governments cannot ignore public opinion. At
a time when public reaction is so strong, the Turkish government will
have to take measures that will in a way represent the aspirations
of the nation that has brought us to govern them. So we are hoping
that those lawmakers in the US understand the implications of this
resolution, which they think is a local issue and has no binding on
Turkey, but it is more than that. It can really inflict long-lasting
damage to the relationship. Explaining the issue directly to the US
decision makers has an effect.
So you say maintaining a direct dialogue has been helping.
Yes. Recently I was in Brussels along with other members of the
Turkish Parliament for the NATO parliamentary assembly meeting,
and there was a US delegation. It was a meeting that took place for
three days. On the first day, when we told them about the Armenian
issue, they didn't take it seriously. They said this is just a simple
non-binding resolution. They said, 'Why are you making a big deal
out of it?' But by the third day, when we explained to them that this
can have implications, all the congressmen were saying, 'As soon as
we go back, we'll meet with [House] Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi, and we
will ask her to revisit the issue and change her opinion.' So talking
and explaining does matter. That is why Foreign Minister [Abdullah]
Gul's visit to Washington was very important. Both his visit and Gen.
[Yaþar] Buyukanýt's visit were influential in sharing with their
counterparts what the sensitivities of the Turkish government are,
both at the civilian and military levels. And I am sure that they
have conveyed the message to the fullest.
What do you think will happen in the end?
I am optimistic. I don't expect this resolution to pass. I always
say the American lawmakers are smarter than that, and they are not
going to make the historic mistake of passing this resolution.
What would you say about the Democrats in Congress, now they are
in majority?
That is one of the complications. The Democrats have taken the
leadership of both the House and the Senate after a 14-year gap. So
for the last 14 years, the Democrats didn't have much international
sensitivity because the Republicans had to deal with international
issues. So for the Democrats, it is just a local issue to please
their Armenian constituency, but now that they are in and are hoping
to run for leader of the free world in two years' time, they have to
learn very quickly the importance of the international sensitivities
and their implications. That's why I think they will, in the end,
do the right thing.
How would the resolution in Congress affect the relationship between
Turkey and Armenia?
Passing resolutions of this sort is just going to make things more
complicated in terms of having rapprochement between Turkey and
Armenia. The prime minister has made a call to the Armenian government
through independent committees of historians and scholars for opening
archives and also inviting scholars from third countries to contribute
with their own archives. But the Armenian government has rejected
the prime minister's call. Erdoðan was the first Turkish politician
ever to say 'I am ready to face my own history if the Armenians are
ready to face their own history,' but I guess the Armenian leadership
wasn't ready.
Is there a chance for dialogue?
There are approximately 40,000 Armenians from Armenia in Turkey. I am
not talking about Armenians of Turkey, who have found themselves a safe
haven in Turkey. I am talking about the ones who are here as illegal
immigrants, and they are mostly nannies taking care of children. So
if there was any sort of hatred in the hearts of the Turkish people,
they would not trust these Armenian nannies with the most valuable
members of their families, their children. This, by itself, shows
that there is an opportunity for dialogue between the two nations.
Nowadays, the future of relations with Iraqi leaders, especially the
Kurdish Iraqi leaders, in light of PKK terrorism, is dominating the
Turkish media. Is the Turkish prime minister considering starting a
dialogue with the Iraqi Kurdish leaders?
A lot of people are confused about the Iraqi Kurdish leaders. The
president of Iraq happens to be a Kurdish gentleman, Mr. Talabani. He
is the president of all of Iraq. So his natural counterpart is our
president, Ahmed Necdet Sezer. Mr. Sezer has the option of talking
with him. Our prime minister's counterpart is the Iraqi Prime Minister
Nuri el Maliki, with whom he has a very open dialogue. If needed,
he [Erdoðan] can talk to Mr. Talabani and he has actually talked
to Mr. Talabani. When Mr. Talabani got sick, Prime Minister Erdoðan
called him and wished him well. One should not confuse Talabani with
Barzani. Barzani is the leader of a regional administration within
the larger concept of Iraq, and his counterparts are obvious. He can
meet with the local representatives of Turkey or with his counterparts
in Turkish foreign affairs, and so forth. So let's not confuse one
from another. In order to protect Turkey's national interests and
the peace around Turkey, Turkey will talk to anyone.
So do you think that Mr. Erdoðan would talk with Barzani?
Before coming to Mr. Erdoðan, there are many other levels that Mr.
Barzani should first contact and show his good will before he has
a chance to talk. Yes, Mr. Barzani has been received at the White
House, where he met with the US president because of the good will he
has demonstrated to the United States. If he shows good will [toward
Turkey], deals with the PKK, captures all members of the PKK in his
territory and delivers them to Turkish justice, then we will consider
at what level he will be received here in Turkey. But it is too soon
to consider that. First, he has to do his homework. He has to work on
initiatives to start a better relationship with Turkey. But different
levels of our government have been in touch with him in the past,
and will be in touch with him in the future as well, depending on
Turkey's national interests and requirements. In the end, no option
is off the table. Turkey has lost more than 30,000 lives because of
PKK terrorism. So nobody should expect us to forget or ignore that.
In his statements, we hear that he has no control over PKK members
in northern Iraq...
If he cannot have any control in the northern part of Iraq, then he
should not consider himself as the leader of that part of Iraq.
About the support from the United States to eliminate the PKK threat,
there is a lot of skepticism in Turkey. Is there any improvement in
that regard?
Historically, the United States was the first ally of Turkey
to declare PKK as a terrorist organization. The US helped us to
convince most of our European allies to regard PKK as a terrorist
organization. The US helped us to capture the leader of that bloody
organization, who had found himself a safe haven at the Greek Embassy
in Kenya. The US has been one of the supporters in trying to hinder
the financial capabilities of PKK in Europe. Also the US helped us
to provide documentation to Danish authorities that ROJ TV is linked
to the PKK. So traditionally and historically the US has been one
of our staunchest supporters in fighting PKK terrorism. But since
the war in Iraq started, because of the sensitivities in central and
southern Iraq, the US troops have been mostly deployed in those areas,
rather than the north. And as the north has been a quiet part of Iraq,
the US feels hesitant in terms of doing anything that can change the
environment there. But the fact that both governments have appointed
high-level representatives to counter PKK terrorism is an indication
that there is a will to deal with this issue.
Then, why do you think there is so much skepticism when it comes to
the US helping Turkey in that regard?
Because Turkish public opinion is sick and tired of seeing more and
more casualties because of the PKK. The PKK members who have found
themselves safe haven in northern part of Iraq, they infiltrate into
Turkey, they place mines and mobile-phone remote-controlled bombs,
they explode them and cause casualties. That is why the Turkish people
are naturally angry and they want our allies to do something about
it. They want to see some real action taken against the PKK.
And there is nothing more natural than that.
Do you think Turkish and US policies toward Iran have been a match?
As of now, there is no match in terms of having a similar dialogue. I
hope the US will have more dialogue with Iran. Turkey and Iran have
been neighbors for ages and we will continue to have that kind of
relationship. The two nations had the concept of their own states
more than a thousand years. So both nations have a deep understanding
of statehood, both nations have experiences in dealing with each
other. The oldest border between any two countries in the world is
the border between Turkey and Iran. Last year, we've had more than
$6 billion worth of trade with Iran. This is a significant figure.
Having said all that, I must add the belief in Iran's right to conduct
nuclear research for energy purposes, for humanitarian purposes. Of
course, we would not want to see any of the countries in our region
have nuclear weapons. That would be a threat to our nation as well. We
would not want to see nuclear weapons in any countries in the Middle
East. We would not want, as a matter of fact, nuclear weapons in any
country in the world. And we could encourage our neighbors, including
the Iranians, not to work to make nuclear weapons. And in our talks
with our Iranian friends, we always told them to cooperate with the
international atomic agency, to be more transparent and to cooperate
with the rest of the world.
------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------
Egemen Baðýþ
Elected to the Turkish Parliament in November 2002 from the Justice
and Development Party (AK Party), Egemen Baðýþ represents Ýstanbul.
He is also foreign policy advisor to the prime minister.
An active member of the Turkish-American community within the US, Baðýþ
was president of the Federation of Turkish-American Associations, the
New York-based umbrella organization of Turkish-Americans. To date,
he is the only president who has been elected by unanimous vote for
two consecutive terms. He also served as a member of the Advisory
Board on Turkish Citizens Abroad, a government body.
His other titles include chairman of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly
Subcommittee on Transatlantic Relations, the Turkish delegation's
deputy chairman to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, chairman of the
Turkish Parliament's Turkey-US Inter-Parliamentary Friendship Caucus
(a counterpart organization to the Turkey caucus in the US Congress).
Baðýþ was born in the eastern Turkish city of Bingol. His family
hails from the neighboring province of Siirt, where his father had
served as mayor.
--Boundary_(ID_Uu1bQUdDiZrt45UI1JnCMw)--