Dr. Çetiner’s Blogs (Dr. Beytullah Gültekin Çetiner)

Turkish Democracy Under Test

Turkish democracy has been facing another test since the application of Chief Public Prosecutor of the Supreme Court of Appeals to the Constitutional Court of Turkey for the closure of leading AKP which earned 47% of all votes in the general elections only 7 months ago. This happened on Friday (14th March) 2008. The democracy had tested last year during the presidential elections in Turkey. It was beginning of yet another military cue which happened on 28th February 1997 in Turkey. Previous attempts against democracy had come through military.

In last year’s democracy test, the court ruling, coming just a few days after an ominous warning from the military about the government’s plans for the presidency was putting Turkish democracy and Turkey’s political system to a deadlock with the ruling. According to ruling, the parliament had to gather with at least 367 of MPs ready for election of President. This meant that to elect the president 2/3 of the parliament should be ready sitting in their seats which would be almost impossible for any of the governments in Turkey. This deadlock in Turkish Democracy was broken by prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan where he said for the court decision “a bullet aimed at democracy”. Never before has a sitting prime minister accused the country’s leading judges of firing “a bullet aimed at democracy”.

This was another social engineering attempt made on 28th of February 1997. Shortly after this declaration, Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan declared the early elections. After the elections his party gained 47% of votes (in earlier case they were only 34%).
After the elections all people in opposition admitted that it was a big mistake (even including people from the Constitutional Court members). In many polls in Turkey, people believe that judges are biased and involved in politics after those sort of decisions made. Public opinion regarding the judges became stronger with the most recent event in Turkey. The following gives brief description on the test of democracy in Turkey.
On Friday (14 March), Chief Public Prosecutor of the Supreme Court of Appeals, Abdurrahman Yalcinkaya applied to the Constitutional Court to close the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and ban 71 of its leading members from politics for five years, including President Abdullah Gül and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The prosecutor justified the closure request with the “anti-laicist activities” of the party.

Members of the AKP have reacted to the closure request over the weekend.

Erdogan: “A step against the national will”

Speaking at a Congress of AKP Women’s Branches in Siirt, Prime Minister Erdogan’s speech was interrupted by the spectators shouting “Let the hands of those break who touch the AKP.”

Erdogan said, “We are a party working for democracy. Those working for democracy do not break arms, hands or feet. Those who work for democracy learn their greatest lesson at the ballot boxes. No one can force the AKP, which was voted for by 16 million 500 thousand voters who believe in a democratic, laicist and social state of law, to become the focal point of laicism. It can also not become the focal point of anti-laicism. Yesterday’s event (i.e. the closure request) was a step taken against the national will.”

“The nation decided to form this party”

He added, “This injustice committed against the nation will not be accepted. A judicial position which uses its power in the name of the people cannot go against the will of the nation. The national will cannot be ignored. Those who are imposing the strange situation of the closure trial will also experience its embarrassment. There is no legal basis for this unfortunate endeavour. Turkey will continue undeterred in its development of rights and freedoms. The AKP was born out of demands for justice. The nation decided to form this party, you decided.”

Arinc: AKP will receive 70 percent

Another leading member of the AKP facing a five-year ban from politics is Bülent Arinc, former Speaker of the Turkish Parliament. He said, “The indictment is the result of hatred and grudges. It will return from court.”

Adding that he felt honoured by being mentioned in the indictment, Arinc continued: “I have been in politics for around 40 years. With the experience of someone who has been mentioned in other indictments, I can say that a party which people try to close down politically is not harmed by these kinds of trials. On the contrary, the phone calls we receive, the solidarity and support around us show us that the AKP will receive 70 percent of the vote in the next elections as a reaction to this oppression and injustice.”

Other ministers condemn closure attempt

Minister of Justice Mehmet Ali Sahin expressed his sadness for Turkey in the light of the closure request:

“This process will help Turkey to get rid of the anti-democratic practices concerning political parties. This process will stop Turkey from being a graveyard for political parties. I want to tell those who are smirking now that they will be left empty-handed.”

Minister of Culture Ertugrul Günay commented on the closure trial, too, saying: “This is not an injustice towards the AKP but an insult towards the country.” He added, “Really, do not take it seriously. Indictments are written, the judiciary makes the decision.”

Liberals and Test of Democracy in Turkey

The liberals accuse both parties in the recent test of Democracy in Turkey. Liberals accuse AKP by not sticking the political reforms which are coinciding with the alignment of accession to European Union. The following part reflects the views of liberals in Turkey. It is written by the Journalist Cengiz Candar. Cengiz Candar is a journalist writing in several places including Turkish Daily News. The article was taken from Turkish Daily News. The title of article is ‘Both parties are guilty’

Both parties are guilty

A short time after Abdurrahman Yalçınkaya, chief prosecutor of the Court of Appeals, resorted to the Constitutional Court, asking for the closure of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), we met for dinner with a group of AKP officials and ministers to talk about the recent developments. One of the top-level AKP officers said, half jokingly, “one of the quickest results of this case for us is to win back liberals.”

“Don’t be so sure,” I said, “That depends on how well or how much you stick to the rope of democracy.”

Democrats in Turkey surely oppose “shutting down parties.” After all, they not only stand against disbanding the AKP that only half a year ago won 47 percent of votes and formed the government, but they also stand against the closure of the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP). Tomorrow, if the opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) is taken to court on a request to be shut down, democrats will of course resist it, too. For them, it is a matter of principle, though they have little in common with the MHP.

At the point where we have arrived, this is more than just a matter of principle; it is something to do with “political action challenging democracy.”

Nonetheless, no one should think of a “democratic attitude” as a variable in a payoff equation that forces Turkey into the common pincers of “barracks and mosque” and which automatically assumes that the democratic attitude sides with the mosque against the barracks.

If the process we have been pushed into is conducted as Turkey’s large-scale “democratization attempt” or the AKP’s “struggle for democracy,” then democrats might think of walking down the aisle together with the AKP.

No one should see democratic public opinion “in the bag” as the AKP’s “reserved forces.”

The point that has arrived is regrettable for our country and highlights the beginning of a dangerous period that all of Turkey may undergo. However, we can barely explain how we reached this point by putting the blame on inappropriate moves of the Ankara bureaucracy under the guise of “leftist nationalists” with “anti-democratic tendencies” or of the coup d’état plotters.

Seeking to shut down a government party that won 47 percent of votes seven months ago by resorting flimsy evidence in an unsound indictment is a desperate move. But how a ruling party with 47 percent of votes became vulnerable to such a move just seven months after assuming office is still worth thinking.

We got sick and tired of saying for months that the AKP is off the “democratic reforms route.”

We have to run a few litmus tests, [a metaphor based on the litmus test in chemistry], to see what else the AKP is aside from being democratic.

“Litmus paper 1:” The AKP’s position on Article 301 of the Penal Code. The ruling party did nothing either to squash or to change this article, which has hung over freedom of expression like the sword of Damocles. The AKP kept stealing time and turned a soccer team always playing the ball in the center or sending it to the touchline.

If you ask Deputy Prime Minister Cemil Çiçek, “People do not care about Article 301.” He doesn’t either and never did.

“Litmus paper2”: The AKP’s attitude in the Hrant Dink murder case investigation. At this point, all hopes fade away. The case seems to be sent to the European Court of Human Rights.

A parliamentary sub-committee formed under an AKP deputy to follow the case suddenly completed works, or left them undone, and annulled itself.

“Litmus paper3”: The energy the must be exerted on the way to the European Union. Let’s remember the first AKP government period, between the fall of 2002 and 2005. Everyone, including Europeans, primarily described the events in Turkey as “silent revolution.” But nowadays no one in Brussels wants to touch the “Turkey dossier” because to tackle Turkey seems a futile act and brings no additional gain to the professional career of European bureaucrats.

The “100 Intellectuals” published a communiqué two weeks ago to alert the government. Turkish Foreign Minister and “Top Negotiator” Ali Babacan do not have time to focus on the latter. So Turkey actually has no chief negotiator for the EU.

“Litmus paper3”: The course of the Ergenekon crime gang investigation. There were doubts that the investigation would run into a dead end at some point. As time passed, reservations matured, and nowadays, although it’s denied, there is a tendency among the AKP’s top officials to relate the Ergenekon investigation to the closure case brought against the AKP.

If you stop halfway and push the decision with some other calculations in mind to dig out anti-democratic structures within the state structure and seek reconciliation, then the “Ergenekon boomerang” will come back and hit you through the closure indictment.

If you do not adopt a decent and determined approach to the closure of the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) and needlessly impose in parliamentary sessions and say “I will not speak with you until you name the PKK terrorists,” then you suddenly share the same fate with it.

Instead of undertaking the responsibility to do your best as the executive party in the Dink murder investigation, but rather adopt a different attitude and say “the issue has been transferred to the judiciary,” making excuses about Article 301 and any anti-democratic provisions in the legal system yet say “Let’s see the implementations,” you would be “transferred to the judiciary” all of a sudden.

How can the AKP have a right to object to the closure case, if there is inconsistency in its own acts?

The AKP’s wrongdoings are innumerable. You name it; from putting the draft constitution on hold and focusing on the headscarf issue, which unnecessarily turned the political agenda upside down, to not touching the Political Parties Law as one of the by-products of the 1983 Constitution in its fifth year in the government.

The case against the AKP finds legal ground with the current Political Parties Law.

It’s really time for the AKP to wake up. It has been seven months since the elections could be termed a “lost period of time,” as a transition period from having the power as the governing party to losing the power as the ruling party.

Winning 47 percent of votes did not help the AKP. They lost control in the state of ecstasy that brought reluctance and some sort of arrogance together. Though they do not accept it, this is how they look from the outside.

The powerful support of 47 percent couldn’t be wasted in seven months this badly.

Now they have to turn this inside out, go back to the reformist attitude of the 2002-2005 period and form “alliances” again.

This is very difficult but possible.

Cengiz Candar/Turkish Daily News (Friday, March 21, 2008)
May there be Ergenekon Connection with the recent closure?

Many people in public and also some ministers from government such as Ertugrul Gunay believe that there is a connection between the Ergenekon case and prosecution of a case brought by chief prosecutor of the Court of Appeals, Abdurrahman Yalçınkaya. According to another columnist Murat Yetkin:-

‘The prosecution process of a case brought by the chief prosecutor of the Court of Appeals, Abdurrahman Yalçınkaya, against the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) will take quite some time. Therefore, there is no reason whatsoever not to conclude the Ergenekon crime gang investigation that the government side ties with the closure case in a cause-and-effect relation.’ (The title of article is Does the AKP closure case forestall Ergenekon investigation? The rest of article may be found here)
Test to Pass or Fail?
Now, the time will show us the result of test for democracy in Turkey. The case is expected to be lasting 5-6 months if the supreme Constitutional Court accepts the document brought by the chief Prosecutor. No doubt about the application of prosecutor being political by majority in Turkey since the document contains many ridiculous statements such as prosecuting even President Abdullah Gul who can be accused of virtually nothing under Turkish constitution. It is pretty likely for the constitutional court to reject the application even only for this reason. But in Turkish people’s minds the acceptance is also likely because the Constitutional Court lost the credit already with the biased decision made last year in case of number 367 with presidency election.

One fact is that the ruling party AKP slowed down the political reforms. In Turkey, the constitution made after military cue is still in power. This problems will always come unless a new constitution made by civilians replaces the old militaric constitution. The AKP concentrated on headscarf issues only with the force of Nationalist Party MHP and made a  functional distraction error which is a vital mistake in systems engineering. Turkey is difficult to enjoy a real democracy unless a new constitution is made by civilians. AKP started the work and has a draft version of new civilian constitution but no time spent on making it legal.

Ergenekon Case

Ergenekon case is considered to be Turkish version of Gladio in Italy. The Ergenekon gang, a neo-nationalist group accused of involvement in plans to stage a violent uprising against the government, was discovered at the end of an investigation that came upon the heels of a police raid in June of last year that uncovered an arms depot in a house in İstanbul’s Ümraniye district. The prosecutor in the Ergenekon case has said the gang worked to create disorder and chaos through divisive and violent acts so the public would be willing to accept a military intervention to restore order.

“Turkish authorities should resolutely pursue investigations into the Ergenekon affair, to fully uncover its networks reaching into the state structures and to bring those involved to justice,” the draft report, prepared by Dutch Christian Democrat MEP Ria Oomen-Ruijten, said.

The group is suspected of involvement in the murder of three Christian missionaries in Malatya in 2007, the 2006 murder of a priest in the northern city of Trabzon, the murder of ethnic Armenian journalist Hrant Dink in 2007, a 2006 attack on the Council of State and a grenade attack on daily Cumhuriyet in 2006.

The draft report also strongly called on the government to speed up its reform process and fulfill its promises on sensitive issues such as Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK). The nine-page draft viewed by Today’s Zaman is expected to be discussed at the Foreign Affairs Committee in April and to be approved by the parliament in May.

The draft, which is expected to be amended several times before approval by the European Parliament, welcomes a declaration by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan that 2008 would be the year of reforms. Another development that the report refers to with satisfaction is the civilian authorities’ success in confronting the military interference in the political process back in April, when the government boldly rejected an intervention by the military in the process of presidential elections.

Welcoming Parliament’s passage of the Law on Foundations granting broader property rights for non-Muslim minorities, the draft calls for vigorous further steps for reforms. Calling the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) a terror organization, the draft says the PKK should declare an immediate and unconditional cease-fire. The draft also took note of Erdoğan’s statements on assimilation, which he made in Germany and which were widely criticized in EU capitals. Erdoğan said in Germany last month that the government wanted the Turks to integrate better in the German society, but rejected assimilation, saying it was a “crime against humanity.”

In her draft report Oomen-Ruijten refrained from using the word “genocide” to describe events of World War I, which Armenians claim amounted to a genocide of their ancestors in eastern Anatolia by the Ottoman Empire. She instead called on Turkey and Armenia to work together to start a process of reconciliation. Oomen-Ruijten, in her previous resolution on Turkey last fall, came under enormous pressure from Armenian groups to refer to a genocide, but she refused to do so.

Zaman newspaper

Fethullah Gulen in Economist

The following article from Economist describes the Fethullah Gulen movement in Turkey. the article is titling it as ‘The world’s leading Muslim network’. Fethullah Gulen is one of the leading followers of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi (1878-1960), famous scholar in Turkey. However, it is a controversial issue and the group is accepted by many as a unique movement by itself. Fethullah Gulen still lives in USA after the post-modern military cue conducted in Turkey on 28th February, 1997.
The world’s leading Muslim network
A Turkish-based movement, which sounds more reasonable than most of its rivals, is vying to be recognised as the world’s leading Muslim network.

It is a long way from the Anatolian plains to a campus in the heart of London, where eminent scholars of religion deliver learned papers.

And the highlands that used to form the Soviet border with China, an area where bright kids long for an education, seem far removed from a three-storey house in Pennsylvania, where a revered, reclusive teacher of Islam lives.

What links these places is one of the most powerful and best-connected of the networks that are competing to influence Muslims round the globe—especially in places far from Islam’s heartland.

The Pennsylvania-based sage, Fethullah Gulen, who stands at the centre of this network, has become one of the world’s most important Muslim figures—not only in his native Turkey, but also in a quieter way in many other places: Central Asia, Indochina, Indonesia and Africa.

With his stated belief in science, inter-faith dialogue and multi-party democracy, Mr Gulen has also won praise from many non-Muslim quarters.

He is an intensely emotional preacher, whose tearful sermons seem to strike a deep chord in his listeners; but the movement he heads is remarkably pragmatic and businesslike.

As a global force, the Gulenists are especially active in education. They claim to have founded more than 500 places of learning in 90 countries.

A conference they staged in London last October was co-hosted by four British universities, plus the House of Lords. Its organisers produced a slick 750-page volume that included all the conference papers.

In its homeland, the Gulen movement is seen as a counterweight to ultra-nationalism. But in places far from home, the movement has rather a Turkish nationalist flavour.

In the former Soviet south, it fights the “Turkish” corner in areas where the cultures of Russia, China and Iran co-exist uneasily.

“If you meet a polite Central Asian lad who speaks good English and Turkish, you know he went to a Gulen school,” says a Turkish observer.

In Kyrgyzstan, for example, the movement runs a university and a dozen high schools, which excel in international contests. Even in Pakistan, pupils at Gulen schools learn Turkish songs, as well as benefiting from gleaming science labs.

Amazingly enough, the Gulen movement has built up a significant presence in northern Iraq, through schools, a hospital and (soon) a university.

Although this arena of Turkish-Kurdish conflict is not the easiest environment for a Turkish-based institution, the movement has deftly built up relationships with all the region’s ethnic and religious groups.

The influence that the Gulen movement has quietly accumulated would be a surprise to some veteran observers of Islam.

Asked to name the world’s most active Islamic network, many a pundit would think first of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose reach has extended a long way from Egypt, where it began in the 1920s as a movement of resistance to the twin evils of secularism and colonialism.

And it remains true that in every Western country (including the United States) where Muslims are politically active, the influence of the brotherhood—or at least of movements that grew out it—is palpable.

Among the brotherhood’s ideological affiliates is the biggest Muslim group in France; a federation that aims to co-ordinate Muslim activities all over Europe; and a “fatwa council” that offers moral guidance to European Muslims.

In Britain, the pro-brotherhood camp has split between a pietist wing and a more political one, known as the British Muslim Initiative, which is now busy organising protests against Israeli actions in Gaza.

On the face of things, the Gulen movement seems more benign—from a Western point of view—than either the brotherhood or any of the other networks that compete for a similar role.

Although the brotherhood tells people to take full advantage of secular democracy, it also insists that the ideal form of administration is an Islamic one.

The Gulenists say their embrace of democracy is wholehearted, not tactical. If there is one group of people who doubt this, it is secular Turks; many view the Gulenists as “chameleons” who only show their true, conservative face in deepest Anatolia.

Still, if the Gulen message is well received in the West, that is partly because the message from other Muslim networks (leaving aside the ones that openly espouse terror) is often so dark.

Take, for example, Hizb ut-Tahrir (Party of Liberation), which is active in at least 40 countries, including Britain and Australia.

Its line is that Muslims should eschew electoral democracy altogether, on the ground that the only regime worth supporting is a global caliphate.

Its maximalist stance, and the solidarity it proclaims with embattled Muslims across the world, can appeal to impressionable students.

Yet another competitor is an Islamic revivalist movement, Tablighi Jamaat, rooted in south Asia but active in Africa and Europe, especially Britain.

Compared with all these groups, the Gulen movement offers a message to young Muslims that sounds more positive: it tells them to embrace the Western world’s opportunities, while still insisting on Islam’s fundamentals.

This measured tone has won the Gulenists many admirers.

But that does not mean that all Western governments automatically accept the movement’s claims of moderation.

“We know we are under surveillance from Western security services,” laments a Gulenist insider.

That is quite true, but so far those services have not detected any hidden ties with extremism.

Turkey: Nabucco Project

The Nabucco pipeline project makes Turkey an energy terminal and connects Europe to large natural gas reserves of the Caspian, Middle East and Egypt.

The pipeline will be 3,300 kilometers long and cost around five billion euros to complete.

It would be completed by the year 2012. Once it is completed, the pipeline will carry 31 billion cubic meters of gas annually.

Nabucco Project Details

The Nabucco pipeline, or Nabucco Project is a planned natural gas pipeline that will transport natural gas from Turkey to Austria, via Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary. It will run from Erzurum in Turkey to Baumgarten an der March, a major natural gas hub in Austria. Some consider the pipeline as a diversion from the current methods of importing natural gas solely from Russia.

Nabucco could bring gas supplies from Iran, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Egypt and Syria. It will be connected near Erzurum with the Tabriz-Erzurum pipeline, and with the South Caucasus Pipeline, connecting Nabucco Pipeline with the planned Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline. It will run from Erzurum in Turkey to Baumgarten an der March in Austria with total length of 3,300 kilometres (2,050 mi).In early years after completion the deliveries are expected to be between 4.5 and 13 billion cubic meters (bcm) per annum, of which 2 to 8 bcm goes to Baumgarten. Later, approximately half of the capacity is expected to be delivered to Baumgarten and half of the natural gas is to serve the markets en-route. The transmission volume of around 2020 is expected to reach 25.5 to 31 bcm per annum, of which up to 16 bcm goes to Baumgarten.

Construction of pipeline is expected to begin in 2009 and is planned to be finished in 2012. It estimated to cost around 4.6 billion EUR (5.8 billion USD). The company leading the project is OMV from Austria.

The Nabucco project is included in the EU Trans-European Energy Network programme and a feasibility study for the Nabucco pipeline has been performed under an EU project grant. The European Commission Nabucco coordinator is Jozias van Aartsen.

More Details on Nabucco Project
The project is developed by the Nabucco Gas Pipeline International GmbH, established in 2004 in Vienna. The shareholders of the company are:

* OMV (Austria)
* MOL (Hungary)
* Transgaz (Romania)
* Bulgargaz (Bulgaria)
* BOTAŞ (Turkey)
* RWE (Germany)

All current shareholders have 16.67% of the shares.

French company Gaz de France was also interested to get a stakes in the pipeline, but was rejected by Turkey.

In future the consortium could include also the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic. Also Kazakhstan has indicated its readiness to join the project.

Alternative to Nabucco Project

Gazprom has proposed an alternative project competing Nabucco Pipeline by constructing a second section of the Blue Stream pipeline beneath the Black Sea to Turkey, and extending this up through Bulgaria, Serbia and Croatia to western Hungary.

News About Nabucco Project

Turkey will complete Nabucco Project successfully, says Turkish Energy Minister Guler.

Turkish Energy & Natural Resources Minister Hilmi Guler said Thursday he believed Turkey would complete Nabucco Project successfully as it did with important projects such as BTC (Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline project) and Shah Sea.

Guler met Jozias Van Aartsen, European Union’s coordinator for natural gas projects in southern Europe, in his office in Ankara.

Guler told reporters Aartsen and he focused on Nabucco Project in their meeting.

“The project is being conducted rapidly. Turkey attaches great importance to this project,” he said.

On the other hand, Aartsen said he would have a meeting with PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan this evening.

Nabucco project is progressing well and Turkey has a great contribution to it, Aartsen said.

Sources for Nabucco Project:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabucco_Pipeline
• http://www.newstime7.com

Population of Istanbul

Istanbul’s population reached 12.75 million as announced by the Turkish Statistical Institution (TUIK). This is almost half of Malaysia’s population which is estimated as 24,821,286 (nearly 25 million) (July 2007)

It is quite high enough to be overlooked, said Istanbul Metropolitan Mayor Kadir Topbas on Tuesday. The population of Istanbul is more than population of many countries.

The bad news is that Istanbul’s population is still rising.

Speaking to reporters after a meeting in Istanbul Topbas said they were not in a race for a higher population figure and pointed out that it could intensify problems.

Topbas said the daily mobility was not taken into consideration in the recent census and argued that when daily visitors from surrounding provinces and the 7 mn. tourists that visit the city were taken into account the population would be much higher.

“We don’t want anymore rise in population. According to our future plans, the city can hold a few more million people but when that is exceeded it will be congested,” said Topbas.

Topbas said Istanbul’s population was estimated as 20mn by 2045 or 2050 and warned that Istanbul could not hold that many people.

“We are setting new thresholds to keep the population in a lower level. By drawing in a work force with better qualifications: by attributing qualities to Istanbul like; financial and convention center we are trying to make it a city relatively free from Industry, ” said Topbas.

About Istanbul

Many people think that Istanbul is the capital city of Turkey. But it is wrong. It was capital city during Ottomans’ era. Now the capital city of Turkey is Ankara. However, Istanbul still is the most dominant city in whole Turkey.

Geographical Location and Natural Conditions

The Bosporus, a narrow straight, links the Marmara See to the Black See, and divides Istanbul into two main parts: a European and an Asian.

The European Istanbul is split in old and modern sections by the Golden Horn, a narrow channel off the Bosporus.

The Bosporus is accompanied by rolling hills over them the city is spread out.

Istanbul has the most important airport in Turkey and the city has been for centuries an international junction to land and sea trade routes. The city has as well the most important Turkish harbour.

For a better traffic flow in the city two bridges were built over the Bosporus and a third one is planned.

Climate and Vegetation

Istanbul has a temperate climate composed of 4 seasons. It is described with warm summers (from 10°C to 29°C) and mild winters (from 4°C to 15°C). The precipitation varies from an average of 33 mm in summer to an average of 107 mm in winter.

Istanbul vegetation zones can be classified in to two groups:

• Scrub and forest as natural vegetation, grove, park and housing gardens made by human efforts.
• Scrubs which occur as a result of destruction of forests are generally found together with forest. Scrub formations are found in the southwest part of Istanbul.

Forests are the main vegetation in and around Istanbul. There are two forests on both sides of the Bosporus, named “Belgrade Forest” at the European side and “Alemdag Forest” on the Asian side. The dominate tree species is the oak (Q. robur, Q. petrea).

General Data

Historical Background

Up to the 15^th century the settlement style which reflects the Byzantium identity followed the same function in Ottoman times and several monuments have been protected until now. From the 16^th century Islamic city form has been gained with urban monuments, silhouette, ports and harbours. In the followed century urban population continued to increase and functional divisions and development structure of the city were defined. In the 18^th century the most important development which defines the identity and macro form of the city was the civil buildings in Bosporus and Halic showing the wealth of the Ottoman Empire.

After 19^th century the traditional society structure of Ottoman couldn’t resist to the industrial revolution in the West. With the demolition of some important monuments in the historical peninsula, roads were built and a new period which has multi- centre, difference in man scale structure, inharmonious permanent and transient structures began. Therefore urban space which Byzantium and Ottoman used for 2000 years lost its attraction. This socio-economic environment destroyed Istanbul’s identity. Western culture continued its effect over urban identity. In the republic period migration beginning from 1945 caused great chances in physical structure of the city. Transition to the open economy is increased, private sector enterprises gained importance, by development of transportation and communication Istanbul became a population attraction centre. Beside the increased migration, the first planning studies to find solutions to urban problems began with H. Prost in 1937 however till now these planning studies haves been insufficient. So as to answer the needs for nearly 10 million people until 2010, Istanbul Metropolitan area sub-region master plan was implemented.

Economy

Istanbul has always been the centre of the country’s economic life because of its location at an international junction of land and sea trade routes. Turkey’s major manufacturing factories are settled in the city. Istanbul province produces cotton, fruit, olive oil, silk, and tobacco. Food processing, textile production, oil products, rubber, metal ware, leather, chemicals, electronics, glass, machinery, paper and paper products and alcoholic drinks are among the major industrial products. The city also has plants that assemble automobiles and trucks.

The economy of Istanbul stands solid on two columns: national it dominates the trade and it has international significance.

Istanbul has 20% of Turkey’s industrial labour and 38% Turkey’s industrial working place. The city occurs 55% of Turkey’s trade and 45% of the coutries’ wholesale trade and Istanbul occurs 21.2% of Turkey’s gross national product.

All in all the metropolis Istanbul is the economical capital of Turkey. It has a population of 10,072,470 inhabitants in 2000 according to the last population census and therefore one of the biggest cities in Europe. Istanbul’s population grows at the rate of 3.45% annually due to the migration from countryside. The city has 54 municipalities and extends for over 100 km. Population density of Turkey is 81 people per sq km but in Istanbul population density is 1700 people per sq km. Istanbul contributes with 40% of all tax collected taxes in Turkey and produces 27.5% of Turkey’s national product.

Because of the social changes Turkey is confronted with problems, which are mostly solved in the western European countries years ago (squatters, mass transportation). A problem for the city administration represents the irregular and illegal urbanisation, which increase rapidly leaving the Greater Istanbul Municipality not much time to search for solutions. A challenge that is constantly growing, especially taking into account the need of collective housing areas addressing to a population of 13.000.000 people which is to be built within metropolitan area until the year 2010.

P.S. The population of Istanbul is according to January, 2008