LAGENDIJK SAYS SOME EU STATES HIDING BEHIND CYPRUS

Today’s Zaman
o?load=detay&link=172917&bolum=8
April 20 2009
Turkey

Joost Lagendijk, chairman of the delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint
Parliamentary Committee, has said European Union member states have the
ability to do "behind the scenes" work to make sure that there will
be a solution on the divided island of Cyprus as soon as possible,
but that some of them are not willing to do this.

"Some countries like to hide behind the Cyprus problem — for example,
the French government and the Austrians. The majority of the EU states
who are in favor of Turkish accession should make it clear within the
EU, to the French, to the Austrians and, of course, to the Cypriots,
that it is in the EU’s interest to have this issue solved," he said.

He warned that if the current negotiations between the isolated
Turkish north and the Greek south, which is already in the EU, for
the unification of the island fail, there may not be a solution for
the next 10 years or, even worse, the island may become permanently
divided.

In an interview with Monday Talk, Lagendijk, who is preparing to
retire from politics and move to Turkey in the summer, elaborated on
the Cyprus problem and other issues in Turkish and EU politics.

What do you think will change the public’s decreasing support for
Turkey’s membership in the EU?

It has gone down substantially, and there are several reasons
for that. One is the fact that important people within the EU keep
speaking against Turkey. [French President Nicolas] Sarkozy is the main
example. That makes people in Turkey think the whole European Union
is against Turkey, even though Sarkozy does not speak on behalf of the
EU. Still, it’s an important signal picked up by people, and they begin
to think, "Whatever we do, we will not be accepted." Psychologically,
it affects people negatively. Secondly, the EU is focused on its
internal functioning, because the new constitution was not adopted in
2005 and we are now trying to adopt the Lisbon Treaty, which should
make the EU more effective and more democratic. And this trend of
looking inward has been strengthened by the economic crisis. People
think, "Let’s deal with our own stuff before inviting new guests into
the house." In a way, it’s a logical reaction.

Are there more reasons?

There is also a lack of visionary politicians in Europe. Too many
politicians who were in favor of Turkey’s accession in 2004, because of
these internal problems in Europe, tend to forget about the long-term
and strategic aims of the EU and Turkey. They don’t speak against
it, but they don’t support the project as strongly as they did,
either. Lastly, the EU made a major mistake in its Cyprus policy. This
is one of the most important reasons that support for the EU in Turkey
has gone down. The EU has not delivered on its promises to northern
Cyprus. That has created a lot of bad blood in Turkey, for good reason.

Aren’t you too optimistic, as many people say of you in Turkey?

I spoke with so many Turkish people before December 2004, and they
said: "The EU will never accept us. You are too optimistic." But then
Turkey started accession negotiations with the EU. So the ones who were
opposed then have become much more vocal since 2005 and 2006. Then
what you need from the politicians is to keep on making the case for
the EU. That has not happened strongly enough. The Turkish government
was also focused on internal functioning, partly for understandable
reasons when you think about the elections, the problems in 2007 and
the court case against the ruling party. Everybody has understood
that they needed to expend energy internally. But after the elections
and after the court case was finalized, we expected the government to
make a case, saying that this is a long-term project and it is to our
advantage so let’s return to the reforms. If not, the public starts
thinking "It is not important for the politicians, so why should it
be important for us?" This was the mood in 2008.

‘Signs indicate Turkey returning to reform process’ What has changed
since then?

This started to change at the beginning of this year with the
appointment of Egemen Bagis_ [as Turkey’s chief EU negotiator]. That
sent a positive signal. With Ali Babacan in Europe, everybody
understood that being a foreign minister of Turkey and being so active
in the region, you can’t combine that with being a full-time chief
negotiator for Turkey in the EU. You have to be in Brussels, you have
to lobby for that. So it’s good to have a full-time person now. And
it’s good to have a person who has good contacts and influence on
the prime minister. Another good sign is TRT 6 [the new state-run
Kurdish language television station]. That’s a positive sign that
was unimaginable 10 years ago. There are also ongoing talks with
Alevi leaders and the Alevi community. I hope this will produce a
compromise between the government and the Alevis. There are also
efforts to make progress between Turkey and Armenia. All these signs
have been taken positively [as meaning] that Turkey is returning to
the reform process. More needs to be done on the Kurdish issue. That’s
where we are now.

Would like to return to the Cyprus issue. In a recent interview with
Monday Talk, Egemen Bagis said the Greek side lacks motivation for
progress in solving the problem and that there is a need for a policy
of carrots and sticks, which was missing from the Annan plan. Do you
think it is possible for the EU to adopt such a policy at this stage
to make the Greek side feel more motivated?

It is. And I agree with him that it is desirable. The point is how
to do it, because you have to be careful not to be seen as the big
bully pushing the small, poor Greek Cypriots to accept all kinds of
things they don’t want to accept. The main role for both the EU and
the Turkish government is behind the scenes to make it clear that we
would like to have a solution as soon as possible. The same goes for
[Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip] Erdogan. If he says we want
[Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali] Talat to do this and that, that
would be counterproductive. For the EU, the question is not whether
they are able to do it; the question is whether they are willing to
do it.

Are they willing to do it?

Some countries like to hide behind the Cyprus problem — for example,
the French government and the Austrians. The majority of EU states
who are in favor of Turkish accession should make it clear within the
EU, to the French, to the Austrians and, of course, to the Cypriots,
that it is in the EU’s interest to have this issue solved. The UK,
Sweden and the majority of the EU states can do it. It is an important
point to stress, because many people in Europe and Turkey have the idea
that Mr. Sarkozy and the Austrians are speaking on behalf of the EU.

You do not count German Chancellor Angela Merkel?

Mrs. Merkel is in between, because she can’t speak out fully, since
there is a coalition government. That could change after the elections
in Germany, of course.

Do you think the equation might change in favor of Turkey after the
elections in Germany?

The equation is in favor of Turkey. People tend to forget that all
the Mediterranean countries, all the Anglo-Saxon countries, all
the Scandinavian countries and the new member states are in favor
of Turkey’s accession. The problem is in Germany, France, Austria,
the Netherlands and Cyprus. These are the five out of 27.

‘Cyprus problem should be solved immediately’ But these five have a
lot of power.

They are powerful countries. They have a lot of influence. It means a
lot. I am not underestimating the resistance. What Mr. Sarkozy likes
to do, if you remember after [US President Barack] Obama spoke out
in favor of Turkey in Prague, he said: "I remain against [Turkey’s
membership]. And I am sure I speak on behalf of the majority of the
member states." That’s not true. That’s why I stress the point that
the majority of the EU member states should push behind the scenes, in
a diplomatic way, not only Cyprus, but also the countries protecting
Cyprus, like France, Austria and Greece — the Greeks have a bit of
double position there — to make it clear to the Cypriots that it’s
in our interest to solve the issue and it’s in the Greek Cypriots’
interest, because if this process fails, if these negotiations do
not produce results, you can forget about a solution for the next 10
years. It may even come down to the division of the island. This is
not in the interest of the Greek Cypriots. The Greek Cypriots realize
that, and that’s why they voted in favor of [Dimitris] Christofias,
not [Tassos] Papadopoulos. If the Greek Cypriots who live in the south
want their property back in the north, they had better make a deal.

If the ruling pro-reunification Republican Turks Party (CTP) loses
support in northern Cyprus, is that going to be a major source
of trouble?

It’s worrisome when it leads Talat to the conclusion that he should be
tougher or more inflexible in the negotiations. It should be a sign
to him that the best way to regain political support is to make a
deal. He has the potential to be the Cypriot leader who brought about
reunification of the island. That’s the only way forward. If he doesn’t
deliver at the end of this year or at the beginning of next year,
he will go down as another Cypriot leader who did not make it, and
then he will be strongly punished in the next presidential elections.

Do you have any ideas about why nationalism has been on the rise in
northern Cyprus?

It’s on the rise everywhere. People want to see a solution, but they
don’t see one coming. They have the frustration of being isolated. The
EU is not delivering on its promises. People are getting fed up with
the situation. They were expecting a lot a couple of years ago, and
it’s not happening. So they think maybe they should not be talking
to the Greek Cypriots and they think they should be tougher to gain
some self-esteem. But this approach doesn’t give you a solution. It
gives you a good feeling. It happens not only in northern Cyprus,
but in parts of the EU, as well. You see that in the Balkans.

If we go back to President Obama’s messages in support of Turkey, do
you think it might negatively affect the way Europeans think because
they perceive it as the US meddling with their own work?

One should make a distinction there between the public opinion and
politicians. Politicians who are against Turkey’s accession will not
change their minds because of Mr. Obama. Sarkozy had not said anything
about Turkey for nine months or so, but now a little bit of provocation
by Mr. Obama and he did. But when it comes to public opinion, they
like Mr. Obama and when he makes a case for Turkey’s accession, it
has a positive influence. Mr. Bush made the same statement in 2004
and then even the ones who were in favor of Turkey’s accession said,
"Please, it’s for us to decide, not for the Americans."

‘Swedish term presidency is good’ How do you evaluate French Foreign
Minister Bernard Kouchner’s recent turnabout against Turkey?

Opportunism. I’m afraid I have to be as tough as that. I don’t
normally like to accuse politicians of opportunism, but in his case,
up to now he was in favor, which was a courageous position to take
because, as a socialist, he is a member of a right-wing government
that is against Turkey’s accession. But using the NATO summit as a
reason to change his opinion is unbelievable. Turkey made a point
about [newly elected NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh] Rasmussen
and his perception in the Muslim world. The Roj TV and the Muhammad
cartoons are not strong points, but the fact is that Rasmussen’s
impression in the Muslim world, whether Europeans like it or not,
is a point that should be discussed. For a French foreign minister to
blame Turkey for doing that is hypocritical. As elections approach,
he may have been pressured by Sarkozy to change his opinion and he
may have been looking for an excuse.

The Swedish turn in the EU presidency is approaching. The Swedish
government has supported Turkey’s accession. Will their term presidency
help Turkey in terms of obtaining more concrete results?

The Swedish presidency is good. Carl Bildt is very favorable. At the
same time, he knows for sure that he has to act as the chair of the
EU. So he cannot act as the Swedish prime minister. He has to balance
different views. But we know he wants Turkey in and he doesn’t want
to create a crisis at the end of this year, especially concerning
the Cyprus issue.

What will happen after the Swedish term presidency? Who will be the
next president?

Many people, including myself, are hoping that during the Swedish
presidency the Lisbon Treaty will be ratified by Ireland. The Czechs
may ratify it as well. If the Lisbon Treaty comes into force, we
won’t have the rotating presidencies anymore.

Can CHP leap forward? Lagendijk says ‘iniallah’

What are your views on the results of the local elections in Turkey?

I told my AK Party [Justice and Development Party] colleagues not to
panic when they got the result of 39 percent, because most European
parties would pay a lot of money to get 39 percent in elections after
being in government seven years and during an economic crisis. I
was expecting them to end up with between 40 and 42 percent,
because two important factors that made them so big in 2007 were not
there. Economic success has turned into an economic crisis, and the
economic crisis has not been handled well by the government. The prime
minister said on too many occasions that it will pass by and that it’s
an American and European problem. It’s not, and people sense that. The
second point is that in 2007, they received an extra, more or less,
5 percent because of the military statement, the e-memorandum, in
April. I spoke with a lot of people in Turkey then, and they said
that they would not have normally voted for the AK Party, but since
the military was so against it, they voted for the AK Party. It’s a
functioning democracy. If people are not happy with one party anymore,
they can vote for another.

Are you hopeful about the main opposition Republican People’s Party
(CHP)? Do you think they can make a leap forward?

I would say "inallah" [God willing]. It’s really a problem for
Turkey that the governing AK Party and the main opposition party are
divided on the issue of the EU. In the history of accession processes,
countries always need to change many things. So you need consensus
among the major parties that EU accession is a national goal and
parties may disagree on details, but they should not disagree on
substance. That’s one of the reasons the AK Party has been less pushy
about reforms, because they know that for each reform they will be
punished by the opposition and the media, which claim that they are
giving in to Europe and selling Turkey out.

CHP leader Deniz Baykal went to Brussels recently.

Yes, it was a good thing. He made a strong commitment there that the
CHP was in favor of accession and that all the misperceptions were
misunderstandings. I hope that is true. I am skeptical, because they
voted against the few reforms that were tabled in the last couple
of years, if you remember, such as Article 301 [of the Turkish Penal
Code (TCK)] and the law on foundations. Now Turkey is trying to make
moves toward Armenia, and Baykal is opposing again. Let’s wait and
see. There is a misunderstanding that I support the AK Party. But I
can work with any party that brings Turkey closer to the EU. And I
am not so friendly with the parties that do not bring Turkey closer
to the EU. I hope the CHP will support the government on Armenia and
the new constitution. Voices coming from the CHP do not indicate that.

——————————————- ————————————-
‘I won’t let my life be ruled by threats’

You have been subject to Article 301 charges in Turkey, and you
received death threats for defending freedom of expression. Does
moving to Turkey make you feel uncomfortable in any way?

No. Of course, knowing that some people who didn’t like me in the
past have threatened me bothers me. I won’t be naive. But it does not
prevent me from doing what I want to do. Those threats were strong
a few years ago. I won’t let my life be ruled by that. I know these
people exist. I won’t provoke them. I will do my work. I will also
keep contributing to the debate. I will speak out, as well.

Do you feel any comfort because of the ongoing investigation into
Ergenekon, as some of those people who threatened you are in jail now?

Of course, I am afraid that those people on trial are not the only ones
with such ideas. It is very important for Turkey that this trial is
a success. It will show many in Europe and Turkey that a new page has
been turned. The Turkish judiciary should deal with this in a proper
way, because every mistake made in the procedure will be highlighted
by those who don’t want the Ergenekon trial to be a success. It’s
especially complicated by the outsiders.

Has it been followed in the EU capitals?

Everybody is watching it carefully to see whether the court case
is handled properly and whether the evidence against people is
substantial. Everybody takes it extremely seriously, for good reason.