Turkey Raises Objections to Rasmussen’s NATO Bid as New Secretary General
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan raised objections Friday to his Danish counterpart’s possible nomination for NATO’s top job, citing lingering Muslim anger over Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed.
In an interview with NTV television, Erdogan said he explained his objections to Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen personally in a lengthy telephone conversation earlier Friday.
“I told him about the annoyance of the public” over his possible nomination for NATO secretary-general, Erdogan said.
“My party has principles… and I definitely cannot contradict them,” he said. “I told him he can appreciate what that means.”
Erdogan said he had received calls from the leaders of Islamic countries urging Turkey, NATO’s only predominantly Muslim member, to veto Rasmussen.
“There was serious indignation in Muslim countries because of the cartoon crisis. These countries are now calling us,” he said.
Rasmussen invoked freedom of expression to defend the publication of a series of irreverant cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper in September 2005, which triggered outrage among Muslims worldwide.
Erdogan said Rasmussen had also failed to act on Turkish requests to ban a Denmark-based Kurdish TV station, widely seen as the mouthpiece of the separatist Kurdistan Workers’ Party, listed as a terrorist group by Ankara and much of the international community.
“It has been four years now and they have not finalised the issue… We are seriously disturbed,” he said.
However, President Abdullah Gul had suggested earlier Friday that Turkey would not block Rasmussen’s nomination, saying that Ankara does not have “any attitude against the prime minister or anyone else on that matter.”
Rasmussen is a favourite to take over NATO’s top civilian post from Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer in August, with most of the alliance’s big powers solidly behind him, but Turkey is seen as a key obstacle.
NATO leaders meet in Strasbourg, France and neighbouring Kehl in Germany on April 3-4 for a 60th anniversary summit, but it is unclear whether the next secretary general of the 26-nation alliance will be announced there.
Turkish First lady interviewed by The Times
Turkish First lady interviewed by The Times
Hayrunnisa Gul, the wife of President Abdullah Gul, underlined in an interview with an English newspaper that it is her head she covers with the Islamic headscarf — not her brain.
Hayrunnisa Gul, the wife of Turkish President Abdullah Gul, underlined in an interview with an English newspaper that it is her head she covers with the Islamic headscarf — not her brain.
The first lady, who was interviewed by Janice Turner of UK daily The Times, said she did not believe headscarves should be forced on women.
“To me, women should not be forced to wear headscarves. It would be hard to find anyone in İstanbul who would disagree with me, at least in public,” Mrs. Gul was quoted as saying.
Gul’s interview was published yesterday in Times2, The Times’ main supplement, which features various lifestyle columns.
The headscarf issue is a topic of fierce debate in Turkey, where wearing the Islamic headscarf is banned in the public sphere.
Its use at universities was prohibited in the late 1990s through an earlier ruling by the Constitutional Court on the grounds that it would violate the nation’s secular principles, as the headscarf was seen as a political and religious symbol.
It was stressed in the Times2 article that the headscarf, worn by a considerable portion of Turkish women, means more in Turkey than in any other country.
“It has become the most potent symbol of a battle for the soul of the country that will determine its place in Europe and the Islamic world,” the article stated.
The article also recalled a closure case filed against Turkey’s ruling party.
“Despite the solid parliamentary majority that enabled her husband [Abdullah Gul] to become president, the country’s Constitutional Court is determined to press ahead with a case intended to outlaw the ruling Justice and Development Party [AK Party] and ban its leading members from politics,” it said.
A top prosecutor requested in March that Turkey’s Constitutional Court close the governing AK Party and place a ban on political party involvement for 71 of its high-level officials, including Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Gul, who was an AK Party member before becoming president and severing political ties as required by the Constitution.
It was also expressed in the article that Western governments must see this case for what it is — an attempted judicial coup.
“It has scant legal basis. If successful it would derail Turkey’s already fraught EU accession and lead many AK Party supporters to despair of the ballot box,” the article read.
Book: Ak Party’s Response to the Indictment
Book: Ak Party’s Response to the Indictment
Ak Party has made the official defense against the Constitutional Court yesterday for the closure case. Ak party has published the “Ak Party’s Response to the Indictment” as a book in English. Ak party had recently announced the recent case as ‘Google Case’. You can find the the claim Google Case in formal manner in related chapters of the book ‘Ak Party’s Response to the Indictment’.
You can get the copy of book from here. The book contains the following chapters.
BOOK: Ak Party’s Response to the Indictment
I. THIS CASE IS POLITICAL, NOT LEGAL
1. In General
2. The Political/Ideological Language of the Indictment
II. FREEDOM OF POLITICAL PARTIES AND ITS LIMITS IN DEMOCRACIES
1. Democracy and Political Parties
2. Universal Standards in the Banning of Political Parties
3. The Banning of Political Parties in Turkey
III. THE CASE LACKS A LEGAL BASIS
1. In This Case the Conditions for Becoming a “Center” do not Exist
2. Our Party Has Committed No Acts Nor Used any Rhetoric Against
Secularism
2.1 The AK Party’s Understanding of Secularism
2.2 Secularism, the Headscarf and Freedom of Expression
2.2.1 Freedom to Wear Headscarves in Universities is Required by the Right to
Individual Autonomy and Freedom
2.2.2 Remarks Regarding Freedom of Dress are Within the Context of Freedom of
Expression
2.2.3 Constitutional Amendments That Are Legislative Activities Cannot Be
Claimed to Be Anti-Secular
3 The AK Party President’s Statements Are Within the Framework of Freedom of
Expression
4 Similar Remarks to the Ones Noted in the Indictment or Even Stronger Ones
Were Made by Various Other Political Leaders
Statements of CHP President Deniz Baykal
Statements of Former Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit
Statements of former Prime Minister Mesut Yılmaz: (Annex-9)
MHP President Devlet BAHÇELİ: (Annex-11)
Former Prime Minister and President Süleyman Demirel’s Statements
5 Defending Children’s Freedom of Religious Education Is Not Against
Secularism
6 Defending a Change in University Entry Eligibility Status for Vocational
Schools is not Against Secularism
7 The State Initiative to Educate Poor Students in Private Schools is Not Against
Secularism
8 Votes and Remarks Made Within the Scope of Legislative Immunity cannot be
Used as Evidence
9 Remarks Made Before the Establishment of the Party Would not Bind It
10 It is not Possible to Attribute to the Party Statements and Actions of Public
Employees Who are Non-members
11 The Neutral President Cannot be Included in a Political Party Case
12 Statements of the TGNA Speaker cannot be Used as Evidence
13 The “Possibility of Violence” Claim in the Indictment is totally a Product of
Imagination.
14 The Foreign Policy of the AK Party Government is Not Unconstitutional
IV. THE INDICTMENT IS COMPOSED OF WRONG INFORMATION, DISTORTIONS AND FICTION
1. The Prime Minister’s New Straits Times Interview Has Been Distorted
2. The Unverified News Reports Have Been Used
3. The Language of the Constitution Has Been Altered
4. For Procedural Reasons The Main Opposition Party Cannot Have
Demanded Review of the Constitutional Amendments
5. The Concept of “Religious Community” is not New to the Legal System
6. The Clause of “Reserving Space for Prayer for Patients” Has been in Effect
for Ten Years
7. Only Repetitive Provisions Have Been Deleted from the Council of
Educational Policy Council Regulation
8. Personnel Assigned to the Educational Policy Council Are Not Members of a
Single Labor Union
9. The Allegation of Partisan Staffing is Groundless
10 Inclusion of Statements of Party Members Subjected to Disciplinary
Investigation in the Indictment is Not Acceptable
11. Statements Later Corrected or Found to Be Totally Baseless Are Included
as Evidence
12. Remarks and Activities Disavowed by Party Officials Are Being Used to
Serve as Evidence For the Claim of Being a ‘Center’.
SUMMARY AND REQUEST