Istanbul

Ferai Tinc, this is a very difficult time for your country in term of domestic politics. At the same time, the arduous journey towards Brussels continues. How do you view the negotiations on EU membership?

I’ll be very frank – I can see mistakes being made on both sides. At this moment in time it seems to me that Brussels is much more concerned with resolving its own internal issues than with analysing with due attention those which concern Turkey.

The reference to the Cyprus question seems to me to be very evident. In October, the premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan attempted to resolve the issue once and for all by asking for the opening of two ports in Northern Cyprus [internationally recognised only by Ankara – ed.] in exchange for recognition of the Greek part of the Island. Brussels, however, flatly refused. What are your views on this?

I think that it was a rash gesture, a sort of last minute attempt at a solution, and neither very courageous nor credible, given that two days after the so-called opening Ergogan declared Turkey’s position to be unchanged. But Brussels doesn’t come out it very well, either.

In what respect was Brussels wrong?

Mainly in not having assessed the issue in the proper way, and having dealt with it at the last minute. There are many in Brussels who consider the Cyprus question to be a regional problem, that ought to be resolved informally. Whereas it is in fact a drama which may explode from one moment to the next and which has its roots in the historical relations between Turkey and Greece, which have always been critical. I have been reading the bulletins that organisations based there have been sending me for several months now, and the intolerance between the two communities is growing day by day. There is an urgent need to find a mutual solution.

Nicosia’s government has, however, up until now, expressed very negative judgements about the plan presented by Ankara.

Nicosia’s government has serious responsibility for certain of its actions, which I fear it will have to be held accountable for very soon – beginning with its misleading of the public prior to the 2004 referendum on the reunification of the island, which was actually rejected by the Greek population.

From a Turkish point of view there can be no doubt as to the reasoning.

But you’re wrong there. It isn’t a question of the Greek or Turkish view. I speak here for both communities. There are almost 200,000 Turks in Cyprus. If a compromise is not found and the Turkish part of the island encounters problems, these will come back to Ankara, which will have to turn to Europe to help it out, and this will create new tensions and a vicious circle. You must believe me when I say that this is a really thorny question that has been dragging on for years now. And I repeat: Europe ought to have thought about it earlier, because this issue is threatening to create a situation of instability in Brussels, too. Not to mention the fact that the presence of vast amounts of petrol on the floor of the Mediterranean could further and seriously aggravate the situation. The issue of borders and territorial waters has yet to be resolved, and my fear is that that submerged treasure could cause new and serious problems. The recent disagreements between Nicosia and the Turkish Energy minister Hilmi Guler illustrate this. Both states (The Republic of Cyprus, with its Greek majority, and Turkey – ed.) believe they have the right to explore the seabed because both feel themselves legitimised to do so. It isn’t difficult to imagine what problems such a situation could trigger.

Speaking of stability, your country in recent times has, unfortunately, experienced a situation without precedent, characterised by a new conflict between the democratically elected executive and the military.

Because the military have had too great a role in the history of Turkey. I think that both groups, government and army, must take measures to get to grips with the changes taking place in the country. The tensions between the two still exist, and the military continues to make its presence felt, but, as I said, we are now a state with a solid democratic foundation.

That’s as may be, but the Chief of Staff, General Yasar Buyukanit, published a communiqué on the 27th April clearly stating that he did not exclude concrete intervention in public life… Given the very tense relationship which has always existed between the two sides, is this not the straw that might break the camel’s back?

If you are referring to the possibility of a coup d’état like that of 1980, I can confidently say no. Turkey today is a state on the road to democracy, and in a hurry to change. And above all it is the mentality of the people which is changing, and so I think a military coup is very unlikely. And interference in public life is increasingly unacceptable.

Although Erdogan has in fact taken a step back, hasn’t he? Many were sure that he would run as a candidate for the Presidency, but instead he has chosen to put forward his ‘heir apparent’ Abdullah Gul. It hasn’t prevented the political crisis, but it nevertheless sends a strong signal. How do you view this?

He wanted to test the ground thoroughly. When he realised that the Turkish people wouldn’t have welcomed his candidacy, he gave up the idea.

In pushing forward into his place the Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul – who opposition journalists have described as an exact photocopy of himself – and, in passing a constitutional reform, following his crushing defeat in parliament, which may potentially split the country in two, has he not gone too far?

This government, over the past 5 years of its mandate, has signalled an intention to carry through various initiatives on a number of occasions – but has always remained very conscious of how these would be viewed by the people. It is not really a party that looks to generate tensions in the country. And I think it will behave in the same way this time. Turkey doesn’t want tensions. Recep Tayyip Erdogan has understood this, and has called early elections.

You can’t deny, however, that the situation is tense.

I think that the tension has been raised by all sides, and I think this is a great shame.

Let’s come back to Europe now. The French elections saw the succession of Nicolas Sarkozy as President of the Republic. One of the principal points of his programme was to block Turkey’s path to EU membership. What would happen, in your view, if Brussels really were to suspend or call off negotiations?

There would be very serious repercussions, and it would be Europe which suffers, both politically, and on the issue of energy. From a poitical point of view, if Turkey is excluded from the EU it will automatically be absorbed into the Middle Eastern sphere of influence, with all the consequences that wold bring, including a shift in the gravitational centre of international terrorism closer towards the West. The recent arrests of Al-Qaida members are significant. And then there is the energy question. Russia is currently pursuing a very aggressive policy. Europe needs alternative resources , such as the Caucasus or the Middle East, and in order to get to them it needs to pass through Turkey. My country is too important to be ignored. Brussels and Ankara must learn to work together to construct a future for their common good.

Translation by Liz Longden