DOCSLIB.ORG

Turkey Conference Book

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Turkey Conference Book INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE WHERE IS TURKEY HEADING ON THE THRESHOLD OF THE MILLENNIUM? Wednesday, May 4, 2011 Venue: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Loretánské nám. 5, Prague, Mirror Hall CONFERENCE SYNOPSIS PANEL I: WHERE IS TURKEY HEADING? At the beginning of the millennium, Turkey’s economy was considerably weak and its political environment, with its short-lived coalitions, was unstable. Ten years later Turkey is a member of the G20 and the domestic political situation has become more stable. The respect for human rights has been strengthened and the key historical and nationalist taboos have been partly broken. However, the society and politics in Turkey remain internally deeply divided on key issues such as laicism, minority rights, freedom of the press, and the democratization of the political system. The process of political reforms seems to have lost momentum and the EU accession negotiations are confronted with severe obstacles for both internal and external reasons. At the beginning of the new decade and before the next parliamentary elections in June 2011, Turkey experiences again a fierce debate on many issues lying at the heart of Turkey’s approach towards democracy. Could Turkey be a “role model” for the democratization and reform in the Middle East, as some observers and politicians present it? PANEL II: TURKEY – A RISING POWER? Ankara’s influence in the region of the Middle East is rising under the leadership of Prime Minister Erdoğan and Minister of Foreign Affairs Davutoğlu. Taking advantage of its economic strength and historical and cultural links with the Muslim world, Turkey’s relations with its neighbors have improved. In general, Ankara’s foreign policy is becoming more assertive. Turkey is taking advantage of its geopolitical position and wants to become a regional power with global influence. Today, Turkey matters more than many would have predicted ten years ago. Yet, the dynamism of Turkey’s foreign policy raises some questions and concerns. Irena Kalhousová Erik Siegl Chief Analyst Program Coordinator Prague Security Studies Institute Heinrich Böll Stiftung CONFERENCE PROGRAM 8.45 REGISTRATION 9.15 OPENING OF THE CONFERENCE 9.30–11.15 PANEL I: WHERE IS TURKEY HEADING? • What are the main accomplishments and deficits after eight years of AKP’s rule? • How democratic are the main political actors in Turkey – the AKP and CHP? Who are the proponents and opponents of democratic changes? • Are there any serious initiatives to overcome the deep controversy regarding laicism, rights of religious minorities and the Kurdish issue? • What are the main issues and who are the main actors as Turkey moves toward the parliamentary elections in 2011? What policy options do they offer? • To what extend is the EU still important for the country’s democratisation process? Could Turkey be a “role model” for the democratization and reform in the Middle East? Key note speech: Joost Lagendijk, Politician and Analyst, Former Chairman of the Turkey-EU Parliamentarians Delegation, Istanbul Policy Center, Sabanci University Panelists: Nurcan Baysal, Researcher, Diyarbakır Institute for Political and Social Research (DİSA), Turkey Murat Belge, Civil Right Activist, Professor at Istanbul Bilgi University, Turkey Gareth Jenkins, Writer and Analyst, Turkey Initiative, Johns Hopkins University, USA Chair: Ulrike Dufner, Head of Heinrich Böll Foundation in Istanbul, Turkey 11.15–11.30 COFFEE BREAK 11.30–13.15 PANEL II: TURKEY – A RISING POWER? • Is Turkey’s political system rooted in an identity-based foreign policy? Is Ankara leaning East-ward and risking the deterioration of relations with the EU and USA? • Should Turkey play a stronger role as a part of the foreign and security pillar of the EU? What would be the prerequisites? How do we evaluate Turkey’s recent foreign policy in this regard? • Are the Turkey-US relations under Obama undergoing a considerable change? What are the determinants of Turkey-US relations? • How will the relations between Turkey and its Eastern neighbors, including Iran, affect the relations between Turkey and the US/EU? • What are the short- and midterm consequences of Turkish-Israeli tension? What should be done in order to restore the good relations between both countries? • To what extent are Turkey’s foreign policy and its economic and energy relations affecting Turkey’s possible role as the “energy hub” for Europe? Panelists: Anat Lapidot-Firilla, Researcher, The Van Leer Jerusalem Institute, Israel William M. Drozdiak, President of the American Council on Germany, USA Soli Özel, Senior Analyst, German Marshall Fund in Istanbul, Turkey Abbas Djavadi, Associate Director of Broadcasting at Radio Free Europe, Czech Republic Chair: Irena Kalhousová, Chief Analyst, Prague Security Studies Institute, Czech Republic 13.15–13.30 CONCLUDING REMARKS 13.30–14.30 LUNCH SPEAKERS PANEL I: WHERE IS TURKEY HEADING? Joost Lagendijk Joost Lagendijk graduated as a historian from Utrecht University. He was a publisher of magazines and non-fiction books for ten years. From 1998 till 2009 Lagendijk was a Member of the European Parliament for the Dutch Green Left Party. In the parliament he specialized in foreign affairs and security and defence issues. For many years he was the chairman of the Turkey Delegation of the European Parliament and the rapporteur for the Parliament on Kosovo. Together with his colleague from the European Parliament Jan Marinus Wiersma, Lagendijk wrote three books: on the borders of Europe, on the foreign policy strategies of the US and the EU and on the European policy towards its Muslim neighbours. Since July 1, 2009, Lagendijk is a senior adviser at the Istanbul Policy Center, the think tank of Sabanci University in Istanbul. He is a columnist for the Turkish dailies Zaman and Today’s Zaman. Nurcan Baysal Nurcan Baysal is a founder of DISA (Diyarbakir Political and Social Research Institute), the first Kurdish think-tank in Turkey and a founder of Development Centre Association in Diyarbakir. From 1997 to 2007, she was the Coordinator of UNDP in the Southeast Anatolia of Turkey. She put major effort in developing women’s non-governmental organizations in the Southeastern Turkey. Baysal serves as an advisor to or a board member on many non-profit organizations like Global Fund for Women, Open Society, Women Labour and Employment Platform, Urgent Action Fund, Dicle University Women Centre, etc. She wrote many articles on development, forced migration and Kurdish issue. She was awarded the WWSF (World Women Summit Foundation) prize for women in 2010. She has been also working in Ozyegin Foundation since February 2008. Murat Belge Murat Belge holds his degree from the Department of English Language and Literature, İstanbul Bilgi Unversity. As a founder and a head of the Department of Comparative Literature at this university, he taught courses on Western and Turkish culture and civilization as well as on militaristic pathways into nation-statehood. Author of dozens of books about literature, he is also a translator of the classics of Anglo-American literature such as Charles Dickens, William Faulkner or James Joyce. Belge has been a regular contributor to many daily columns, most currently to Radikal. Gareth Jenkins Gareth Jenkins is a writer and analyst based in Istanbul, Turkey, where he has been resident since 1989. During his first ten years in Turkey, he worked as a journalist for international wire services, newspapers and periodicals, covering a broad range of political, economic and social issues related to Turkey and the surrounding region. In recent years Jenkins has focused primarily on analysis, contributing numerous articles, reviews and commentaries to scholarly journals and edited volumes and delivering presentations at seminars and conferences. His special fields of interest are civil-military relations, terrorism and security issues and political Islam. He is currently a nonresident Senior Fellow with the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute and Silk Road Studies Program, a joint initiative by the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins University (US) and the Institute for Security and Development Policy (Sweden). Ulrike Dufner Ulrike Dufner has been the Director of the Heinrich Böll Foundation Office in Turkey since January 2004. She is an expert on foreign policy and international relations, conflict resolution and management as well as on Turkey, Near and Middle East. Dufner previously served for two years in the Foreign Office of the Federal Republic of Germany at the Turkey and South-Caucasus desks. During the years 1996–2002, she served as an advisor on international politics, conflict management and resolution, international human rights issues with special emphasis on the Near and Middle East as well as Maghreb countries at the Parliamentary group of Alliance 90/The Greens in the German Bundestag. Dufner, who took an active role in feminist and peace movements in Germany, conducted a research in Egypt and Turkey. In 1996 she acquired her PhD in Political Science, Turkology and Modern History. PANEL II: TURKEY – A RISING POWER? Abbas Djavadi Abbas Djavadi is associate director of broadcasting at RFE/RL, overseeing programs in Persian (Radio Farda), Dari and Pashto (Radio Free Afghanistan), Arabic (Radio Free Iraq), Tajik, Uzbek, Turkmen, Kyrgyz, and Kazakh. He joined RFE/RL in 1985 as an editor of the Azeri Service and later served as a supervising analyst of the Central Asian programs and Director of RFE/RL’s Tajik Service. He set up RFE/RL’s first broadcasts to Iran (Radio Azadi) in 1998 and Radio Free Afghanistan in 2002. After serving for more than three years as Director of RFE/ RL’s Azeri Service, Abbas was promoted to Associate Director of Broadcasting. Before joining RFE/RL, Abbas worked as a lecturer at the University of Cologne, Germany, and contributed to a dozens of newspapers, magazines, and broadcast services in Germany, Great Britain, Turkey, Iran, Tajikistan, and Azerbaijan. He has written two books and numerous articles on Persian and Azeri languages, socio-linguistics, politics, and history.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Complete Dissertation
    VU Research Portal Impressions of European Integration 't Lam, P.A. 2012 document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in VU Research Portal citation for published version (APA) 't Lam, P. A. (2012). Impressions of European Integration: A comparative analysis of the impact of EU news in European newspapers on European audiences. BOXPress. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. E-mail address: [email protected] Download date: 26. Sep. 2021 IMPRESSIONS OF EUROPEAN INTEGRATION A comparative analysis of the impact of EU news in European newspapers on European audiences Peter ’t Lam VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT Impressions of European Integration A comparative analysis of the impact of EU news in European newspapers on European audiences ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad Doctor aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, op gezag van de rector magnificus prof.dr.
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament
    EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ««« « « « « 1999 « « 2004 ««« Session document FINAL A5-0332/2001 11 October 2001 REPORT on the progress achieved in the implementation of the common foreign and security policy (C5-0194/2001 – 2001/2007(INI)) Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy Rapporteur: Elmar Brok RR\451563EN.doc PE 302.047 EN EN PE 302.047 2/18 RR\451563EN.doc EN CONTENTS Page PROCEDURAL PAGE ..............................................................................................................4 MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION .............................................................................................5 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT............................................................................................11 RR\451563EN.doc 3/18 PE 302.047 EN PROCEDURAL PAGE At the sitting of 18 January 2001 the President of Parliament announced that the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy had been authorised to draw up an own-initiative report, pursuant to Rule 163 of the Rules of Procedure and with a view to the annual debate pursuant to Article 21 of the EU Treaty, on the progress achieved in the implementation of the common foreign and security policy). By letter of 4 May 2001 the Council forwarded to Parliament its annual report on the main aspects and basic choices of the CFSP, including the financial implications for the general budget of the European Communities; this document was submitted to Parliament pursuant to point H, paragraph 40, of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 (7853/2001 – 2001/2007(INI)). At the sitting of 14 May 2001 the President of Parliament announced that she had referred this document to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy as the committee responsible (C5-0194/2001).
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Whom Does the European Parliament Represent?
    UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) The European Parliament’s quest for representative autonomy: An internal perspective Buitenweg, K.M. Publication date 2016 Document Version Final published version Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Buitenweg, K. M. (2016). The European Parliament’s quest for representative autonomy: An internal perspective. General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:26 Sep 2021 1. Whom Does the European Parliament Represent? The origin of this study is the controversial judgment of the German Federal Con- stitutional Court (GFCC) regarding the Lisbon Treaty.1 It was handed down on Tuesday, 30 June 2009, just weeks before the end of my second (and final) term as a member of the European Parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond the Deadlock? Perspectives on Future EU Enlargement
    Beyond the deadlock? Perspectives on future EU enlargement E-publication edited Joost Lagendijk and Jan Marinus Wiersma Clingendael Institute, The Hague, 2012 © Clingendael Institute Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’ Clingendael 7 2597 VH The Hague P.O. Box 93080 2509 AB The Hague Phone: + 31-70-3141950 Telefax: + 31-70-3141960 Email: [email protected] Website: www.clingendael.nl © Clingendael Institute Note of the Editors The Netherlands Institute for International Relations Clingendael hosted a one-day seminar on the future of EU enlargement on the 29th of November 2011. The event was chaired by Joost Lagendijk, Senior Advisor Istanbul Policy Center, and Jan Marinus Wiersma, Senior Visiting Fellow Clingendael. As the title of the conference – Beyond the deadlock? Perspectives on future EU enlargement – indicates, the debate concentrated on the differences between the accession rounds of 2004 and 2007 en the one that is now under way. Both the EU and the (potential) candidate countries operate in a different context that is marked by a much stricter conditionality of the EU which has a negative impact on the speed of the enlargement process. The countries in question, with the possible exception of Iceland, are confronted with internal opposition to the EU, sometimes show a lack of reform mindedness and have difficulty coping with political obstacles like the Cyprus issue in the case of Turkey or the Kosovo question. The agenda of the seminar consisted of three main topics: lessons learned from past accessions, the cases of Turkey and Macedonia, and the future of enlargement. They are being dealt with in this publication from different angles.
    [Show full text]
  • Voice of the People Manuscript EU and the Enlargement with Answers from Politicians at the Parliament TVSYD, Brussels
    Voice of the People Manuscript EU and the Enlargement With answers from politicians at the Parliament TVSYD, Brussels Crew: Journalist: Lene Krüger Camera: Mohsen Safarkhanlou Editing: Kurt Nielsen Banke Duration: 4’50 Music: Translation EU and the Enlargement With answers from politicians at the Parliament TVSYD, Brussels 0’’02 Poul Bodholdt, Blacksmith, Denmark “What countries are in? This is actually the only thing I would like to ask about” 0’06 SIGN: Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Czech Republic and Hungary will become members of the European Union the 1st May 2004 0’19 Graham Watson, Member of the Parliament, UK We have ten countries joining the European Union. It sounds like a lot, but in reality it’s not a bigger expansion than when Denmark, GB and Ireland joined the Union back in 1970ties. We are increasing our land area by 35%, but our population will grow with under a quarter. It’s not too much to digest. But clearly what it does is to provide opportunities for the present citizens of the European Union to visit those countries, to do business there, to travel much more easily across a much wider area. I already know of people from Denmark buying holyday homes in Estonia. This is the kind of development, that enlarging the Union allows for 1’20 Joost Lagendijk, Member of the Parliament, Netherlands Eight of those 10 countries belong to the former Soviet block. And after 1989 after the fall of the wall we said to them, you’re welcome with us. The EU is not only the Western Europe; it’s the whole of Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament
    EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ««« « « « « 1999 « « 2004 ««« Session document FINAL A5-0392/2000 7 December 2000 * REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation creating the Rapid Reaction Facility (COM(2000) 119 – C5-0272/2000 – 2000/0081(CNS)) Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy Rapporteur: William Newton Dunn RR\427816EN.doc PE 285.651 EN EN Symbols for procedures * Consultation procedure majority of the votes cast **I Cooperation procedure (first reading) majority of the votes cast **II Cooperation procedure (second reading) majority of the votes cast, to approve the common position majority of Parliament’s component Members, to reject or amend the common position *** Assent procedure majority of Parliament’s component Members, except in cases covered by Articles 105, 107, 161 and 300 of the EC Treaty and Article 7 of the EU Treaty ***I Cooperation procedure (first reading) majority of the votes cast ***II Codecision procedure (second reading) majority of the votes cast, to approve the common position majority of Parliament’s component Members, to reject or amend the common position ***III Codecision procedure (third reading) majority of the votes cast, to approve the joint text (The type of procedure depends on the legal basis proposed by the Commission.) PE 285.651 2/32 RR\427816EN.doc EN CONTENTS Page PROCEDURAL PAGE ..............................................................................................................4 LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL.....................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • The Dutch Debate on Enlargement
    Communicating Europe Manual: The Netherlands Information and contacts on the Dutch debate on the EU and enlargement to the Western Balkans Supported by the Strategic Programme Fund of the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office 23 November 2009 www.esiweb.org 2 Communicating Europe: The Netherlands Manual ABOUT THIS MANUAL Who shapes the debate on the future of EU enlargement in The Netherlands today? This manual aims to provide an overview by introducing the key people and key institutions. It starts with a summary of core facts about the Netherlands. It also offers an overview of the policy debates in The Netherlands on the EU, on future enlargement and the Western Balkans. Space is also given to the media landscape; TV, radio and print media and the internet-based media. Any debate in a vibrant democracy is characterised by a range of views. Nonetheless, when it comes to Dutch views on EU enlargement, the people included in this manual are certainly among the most influential. This manual draws on detailed research carried out by ESI from 2005 to 2006 on enlargement fatigue in the Netherlands and on the Dutch debate on Turkey. Fresh research has also been carried out in 2009 especially for the Communicating Europe workshop co-sponsored by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, with the Robert Bosch Stiftung and the European Fund for the Balkans. This text is the sole responsibility of ESI. ESI, Amsterdam, November 2009. www.esiweb.org Communicating Europe: The Netherlands Manual 3 CONTENTS ABOUT THIS MANUAL .................................................................................................................... 2 KEY FACTS ......................................................................................................................................... 5 THE DUTCH POLITICAL PARTIES............................................................................................... 6 DUTCH ATTITUDES TO THE EU - THE 2005 REFERENDUM AND BEYOND .....................
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament
    EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 2004 2009 Session document FINAL A6-0065/2004 6.12.2004 REPORT on Bulgaria's progress towards accession (COM(2004)0657 – C6-0150/2004 – 2004/2183(INI)) Committee on Foreign Affairs Rapporteur: Geoffrey Van Orden RR\347309EN.doc PE 347.309v02-00 EN EN PR_INI_art45 CONTENTS Page MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION............................................ 3 OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS.................................................................. 6 PROCEDURE ............................................................................................................................ 9 PE 347.309v02-00 2/10 RR\347309EN.doc EN MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION on Bulgaria's progress towards accession (COM(2004)0657– C6-0150/2004 – 2004/2183(INI)) The European Parliament, – having regard to the Commission's 2004 Regular Report on Bulgaria's progress towards accession and the Strategy Paper (COM(2004)0657 – C6-0150/2004)1, – having regard to the Presidency Conclusions of the Copenhagen European Council of 12 and 13 December 2002, the Thessaloniki European Council of 19 and 20 June 2003 and the Brussels European Council of 12 and 13 December 2003, – having regard to its resolutions and reports since the beginning of the accession process, – having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A6-0065/2004), A. whereas Bulgaria is a part of the current inclusive and irreversible enlargement process, B. whereas the accession process must be based on the own merits principle and the timing of Bulgaria's accession should not be linked to that of any other candidate countryand Bulgaria should therefore accede to the EU on the basis of an individual accession treaty, C.
    [Show full text]
  • Politiek Jaarverslag 2003 26 Januari 2003
    Politiek jaarverslag 2003 26 januari 2003 Intro 2003 was in veel opzichten een annus horribilis voor de Europese Unie. De Europese verdeeldheid over de oorlog in Irak, de onttakeling van het Stabiliteitspact en het geruzie over de Europese Grondwet leverden voer voor eurosceptici die menen dat de Europese integratie haar grenzen heeft bereikt. Toch is die conclusie voorbarig. Er is geen reden om te zwelgen in pessimisme. Elke crisis schept weer nieuwe kansen. Zo heeft de Irak-crisis duidelijk gemaakt dat een grote meerderheid van de Europeanen, in de oude én de nieuwe lidstaten, niet te winnen is voor militair avonturisme aan de zijde van de VS. Bush' recept van unilaterale preventieve oorlogvoering stuit in Europa op veel weerstand. Ook regeringen die tot nu toe Washington slaafs gevolgd hebben, zoals de Britse en de Nederlandse, zullen zich nog eens achter de oren krabben vooraleer zij opnieuw met de VS aan de VN voorbijgaan. Zeker gezien de mate waarin hun gebrek aan legitimiteit de Amerikaans-Britse bezetters van Irak nu parten speelt bij de wederopbouw van Irak. De lessen van Irak zijn neergeslagen in de Europese veiligheidsstrategie, die in december werd goedgekeurd. Dit document van de hand van EU-buitenland-coördinator Solana kiest eenduidig voor een multilaterale aanpak van bedreigingen zoals terrorisme, massavernietigingswapens en mislukte staten, en hanteert een breed veiligheidsconcept, met veel nadruk op de niet-militaire instrumenten waarover de EU beschikt om crises te bezweren. Deze veiligheids-strategie helpt het Europees buitenlands en veiligheidsbeleid een stapje vooruit. Door de toetreding van tien nieuwe lidstaten op 1 mei aanstaande - wat op zichzelf al een geslaagd project van conflictpreventie is - zal het de EU nog duidelijker worden dat zij niet kan wegduiken voor haar verantwoordelijkheid voor mondiale vrede en veiligheid.
    [Show full text]
  • The Co-Chairman Mr LAGENDIJK Opened the Meeting at 15H10
    EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 58th MEETING OF THE EU-TURKEY JOINT PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE Ankara, 21-22 November 2007 MINUTES Contents Page 1. Adoption of the draft agenda 2 2. Adoption of the minutes of 57th EU-Turkey JPC Meeting which took place 2 in Brussels on 27-28 November 2007 3. Political situation in Turkey and the EU 2 Introductory statements by - the Turkish Government - the Presidency-in-office - the European Commission - the Rapporteur of the European Parliament 4. The Lisbon Treaty and its importance for Turkey's accession 9 5. Iraq and cooperation in the fight against terrorism 11 6. Any other business 13 7. Date and place of the next meeting 13 ANNEX: List of participants PV/721908EN.doc PE 406.738 1. Adoption of the draft agenda The draft agenda was adopted. 2. Adoption of the minutes of the 57th EU-Turkey JPC meeting which took place in Brussels on 27-28 November 2006 After an exchange of views the minutes were adopted with three modifications. 3. Political situation in Turkey and EU The Joint Parliamentary Committee heard a welcome address by Mr Köksal TOPTAN, speaker of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, in which he focused on the importance of the Turkish accession to the EU. In particular, he pointed out to the foreign policy dimension of Turkey's membership, which would strengthen the EU´s role on the international scene. Also, he underlined that the accession process is not only about the modernisation of Turkish society and economy, but also about values Turkey shares with the EU.
    [Show full text]
  • Themes on Linguistic Diversity Encountered in the Plenary Debates of the European Parliament 2000 - 2003
    Themes on Linguistic Diversity Encountered in the Plenary Debates of the European Parliament 2000 - 2003 i ii THEMES ON LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY ENCOUNTERED IN THE PLENARY DEBATES OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 2000 – 2003 A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in European Studies at the University of Canterbury GARTH JOHN WILSON National Centre for Research on Europe University of Canterbury May 2009 iii iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to all the staff – academic and administrative – of the National Centre for Research on Europe for all the willing assistance given to me during my time writing this thesis. The cheerful and positive “team” atmosphere prevalent at the Centre has been a source of encouragement throughout my time at the University of Canterbury. Particular thanks are due, first and foremost, to Professor Martin Holland, Director of the Centre and also my supervisor. These thanks are due for all his guidance and for his ready willingness to find time to discuss matters related to my thesis with me amid his very busy schedule of research, teaching and all those trips he undertakes to meetings and conferences within New Zealand and overseas. The knowledge and experience that he has shared have been invaluable to me, and his regular feedback has inspired me to keep going to the “end”! He has created in the Centre a stimulating environment in which to do research. Thanks are due also to Dr Natalia Chaban, the Deputy Director of the Centre, for the support and positive encouragement she has freely given to me throughout.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey and Europe: Why Strained Friendship Is Fraying
    November 8, 2006 Turkey and Europe: Why Strained Friendship Is Fraying By Dan Bilefsky ISTANBUL — The already reluctant partnership between Turkey and the European Union looks increasingly as if it may be headed for a messy breakup, prompting many in Europe and the United States to ask an uncomfortable question: will the large, secular Muslim country then look east instead of west? It is a question with potentially great consequences. “If the E.U. turns its back on Turkey, it is the West that will be the big loser,” warns Mehmet Dulger of the ruling Justice and Development Party and the chairman of the foreign affairs committee in Parliament. “The West would risk losing a vital bridge with the Islamic world at a time when having this bridge is more important than ever.” The mutual suspicion is reaching a crisis point. On Wednesday, the European Commission is to release a report critical of the progress Turkey has made toward conforming to European standards and toward qualifying for membership. A more important deadline looms next month at a European summit meeting, where leaders could decide to suspend talks with Turkey on a number of problems, while continuing in other areas. This is something the group never did as it was expanding to its current 25 members. Political analysts in Turkey say such a rebuff would intensify an anti-European backlash and play into the hands of nationalists and Islamists, some of whom are already asking whether the country should reject Europe before it rejects Turkey. “Until recently, Turkey has been able to pursue pro-Western policies because public opinion believed this was in the national interest,” said Soner Cagaptay, director of the Turkish research program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
    [Show full text]