Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Open-Letter To The EU Foreign Ministers

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Open-Letter To The EU Foreign Ministers

    OPEN-LETTER TO THE EU FOREIGN MINISTERS
    Written by Dr Harry Hagopian

    Newropeans Magazine, France
    Sept 6 2005

    Dear EU Foreign Ministers,

    I refer to the EU Gymnich 2005 informal meeting today at the Celtic
    Manor Resort near Newport in Wales. One of the key items on your
    agenda will be the formal opening of accession talks with Turkey on
    3 October 2005.

    I have often written or spoken about the inter-woven issues surrounding
    Turkey's accession to the EU, and have also voiced my own support for
    such membership so long as its fundamental criteria of admission are
    neither overlooked nor overruled for the sake of politically-spun
    expediency. Therefore, this Open Letter aspires to represent my
    succinct guidebook to some of the topical points addressing Turkey's
    bid to accede to the European Union. I hope you would take it into
    consideration as you steer the future of the European Union, and as you
    vet new members wishing to join this club in future years or decades.

    The talks between the EU & Turkey are open-ended. Therefore, there is
    no need for any haste in the decision-making process, as more of your
    time should be spent in verifying that Turkey is indeed adhering to
    the five criteria of the Copenhagen Summit of 2002. After all, these
    criteria, covering political and socio-economic factors, also focus
    strongly on democracy, good governance and human & minorities' rights.

    I realise that Turkey recently extended its customs union protocol to
    the ten new EU member-states (including the Republic of Cyprus), but
    such extension does not include diplomatic recognition of Cyprus. As
    the French Prime Minister stated, it is inconceivable let alone
    impolitic to envisage a process of negotiation with a candidate
    country that does not recognise another EU member-state or grant its
    [Cypriot] ships and planes access to Turkish ports and airports under
    the customs union.

    I have noted that an idea mooted in the EU corridors for some months
    now, mainly that of granting Turkey a privileged partnership rather
    than full membership, has re-surfaced once more. Germany, in the throes
    of an election between the incumbent Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder (SPD)
    and Angela Merkel (CDU), as well as Austria and other EU and non-EU
    European countries, are proponents of this Iceland-type approach.

    In fact, and unless my reading of the EU compass is totally off-centre,
    it is not possible to decide with finality on Turkey's accession until
    2014 anyway - corresponding to the date of the next EU seven-year
    budget.

    I have also been following the economic strides that Turkey has made
    in the last period. There have been noticeable and praiseworthy
    improvements in the fields of unemployment, inflationary rates,
    banking system, education levels, income & corporate taxes - all
    definitively helping strengthen the economy.

    However, for the sake of being thorough, let me also add that much
    of the optimism over Turkey's economic roadmap has been over-egged
    - possibly for political and PR purposes - and there still remain
    serious indicators let alone concerns about the impact of Turkey's
    accession to the EU. For instance:

    Subsidies that would go to Turkey alone are estimated to exceed.

    [email protected] billion and, according to some predictions, balloon to [email protected]
    billion - including vast agricultural subsidies and regional aid;
    Rather than providing an educated and sophisticated labour force.

    for Europe at large, those leaving Turkey to seek work in the EU
    in a post-accession environment will in all likelihood be poor,
    uneducated and in large numbers - causing an imbalance in employment
    scales within the EU; In the last year, there has been a 134% rise
    to $10.4 billion in.

    the country's current account deficit; Turkey is running a massive
    debt, and includes $23 billion owed to the IMF as well as billions
    borrowed via the international bond markets; Given that the mean
    gross public debt is around 40% of gross.

    domestic product in the new member-states, it is noteworthy that
    Turkey's gross debt is double that figure at c. 80% of its GDP.

    At this stage, I must also raise another issue that is close to my
    own heart. As an Armenian, who is also an international legal and
    political consultant, I wish to remind you of the Armenian Genocide
    of 1915 and link it with some of the rights and values that I cherish
    most within the EU - including the fundamental freedom of expression.

    Now, I do realise that this 90-year-old issue evokes different
    reactions within different EU countries. On the one hand, it is clear
    that the issue of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide still
    produces a measure of indifference within a few of the twenty-five
    countries of our Union. On the other hand, it generates various
    degrees of irritable non-support, expedient support or full-fledged
    support within most other member-states.

    Mind you, I cannot understand the position of our own Government
    as it constantly re-iterates its regret about the massacres in
    1915 against Armenians but adds that there is no evidence that they
    constituted genocide according to the 1948 United Nations Convention
    on Genocide. Surely an unethical position, when one thinks of the
    litany of eminent British and international historians who have
    unequivocally stated that this was indeed genocide.

    Not only that, but the Blue Book (The Treatment of Armenians in the
    Ottoman Empire, 1915-6), which the historian Arnold Toynbee compiled
    for Lord Bryce during WWI, is of relevant historical evidence. It
    is a written and textual indictment of Ottoman Turkey by eyewitness
    accounts that described the atrocities committed against Armenians
    during WWI. Turkey has attacked this book, published by Her Majesty's
    Stationery Office, as war propaganda. Yet, when this question was put
    to Toynbee in a personal letter, he replied: - It is true that the
    British Government's motive in asking Lord Bryce to compile the Blue
    Book was propaganda. But Lord Bryce's motive in undertaking it, and
    mine in working on it for him, was to make the truth known, and the
    evidence was good: the witnesses were all American missionaries with
    no political axe to grind. So the Blue Book, together with Lepsius'
    book {Deutschland und Armenien, 1914-1918}, does give a true account.

    Turkey's reaction to the Armenian Genocide goes well beyond sheer
    denial. In order to expunge itself of the burden of mens rea or
    its criminal intent, it is now imputing this intent on Armenians
    by claiming that they were the ones who perpetrated those genocidal
    massacres against Turkey. Such a reaction regrettably reminds me of
    the psychology of more recent genocidal chapters in Rwanda or Darfur
    when victimisers try to project themselves as victims.

    But Turkey is now also muzzling the fundamental freedom of expression
    within its territories. Allow me to refer you to one instance. Orhan
    Pamuk, perhaps the most acclaimed Turkish author whose books
    include My Name is Red and Snow, gave an interview to the Swiss
    newspaper Tages-Anzeiger on 6 February 2005 in which he was quoted as
    saying that Turkey killed 30,000 Kurds and one million Armenians. A
    prosecutor in Istanbul has now indicted Mr Pamuk under Article 301[1]
    of the Turkish Penal Code on charges that his remarks amounted to a
    'public denigration' of Turkish national identity - punishable by up
    to three years' imprisonment.

    Dear EU Foreign Ministers, you are surely well aware that the overall
    mood within the European Union has altered dramatically in the last
    year or two. It can perhaps best be amplified by the volatile discourse
    within the whole EU about the Constitution that culminated with
    significant rejections in France and the Netherlands. As a European
    citizen, I do not believe at all that the EU project is dead. Nor
    do I believe that it should be shelved and later transmuted into an
    ante factum free-trade market. Much of Europe would still support
    the post-war philosophy of Europe and its coherent harmonisation,
    so long as its structures are reformed, transparent and accountable,
    and that the yawning gap between ruling politicians or bureaucrats and
    the overwhelming European population is narrowed down. The tool cannot
    become the toolmaker, and the EU needs to listen to its constituents
    as it moves forward. After all, you need simply log on the newropeans
    magazine web-site to assess the strength of innovative feelings
    running within the EU - regardless of dubious political distinctions
    made between old and new Europe.

    My guidebook highlights those challenges that Turkey as the applicant
    country, and the EU as the host body, both face today. I hope you
    will not shy away from adopting those constructive decisions that
    could ultimately help strengthen the EU. Do not seek discouragingly
    paternalistic solutions. Sophistry or cosmetic powder will not dupe
    the EU citizens any longer - certainly not at a time when they are
    questioning you about their collective futures.

    Today, in Wales, it behoves well for Turkey to remember that it cannot
    keep using its hackneyed arguments - be it on Cyprus, the necessary
    reforms it must undertake, its approach to the human and minorities'
    rights of its own citizens or the Armenian Genocide. It is no longer
    enough to hide behind arguments of Islam versus secularism, political
    chauvinism or even geo-strategic interests.

    Indeed, it does not bode well for Turkey's admission to the EU when
    it trashes a Report on minority and cultural rights, prepared by the
    Human Rights Advisory Board and chaired by Professor Baskin Oran,
    because it does not support the official Turkish thesis. It does
    not bode well either when it cancels an academic conference on the
    Armenian Genocide [at the Bogazici / Bosphorus University] because
    the Turkish Minister of Justice Cemil Cecik believes it is 'a stab
    in the back of the Turkish nation'.

    The EU project has taught me that narrow-minded ideological nationalism
    no longer sits well anymore with our more freedom-friendly and open
    EU today. You should call upon Turkey to move forward, not backslide
    at every turn. After all, if I am to welcome Turkey into the European
    fold, do you not think I have the right to ask that it uphold those
    same Eurocentric principles that I as a European must uphold too?

    I wish you success in your deliberations for the overall good of the
    larger European Union.

    Yours in Europe,

    Dr Harry Hagopian, LONDON - 1 September 2005

    LL.D- Executive Consultant Campaign for Recognition of the Armenian
    Genocide (CRAG) [Committee of the] Armenian Community & Church Council
    (ACCC)
Working...
X