TÜRK DELEGASYONU ÜYELERİNİN GENEL KURUL TOPLANTILARINDA YAPTIĞI KONUŞMALAR
AVRUPA KONSEYİ
PARLAMENTER MECLİSİ İLKBAHAR GENEL KURUL TOPLANTISI
31 MART-4 NİSAN 2003,
STRAZBURG
EUROPEAN CONFERANCE OF
MINISTERS OF TRANSPORT
Mr AÇIKGÖZ (Turkey). – I
thank the rapporteur for his excellent work, and I fully agree with him that
transport is a key element for the proper functioning of modern economies. This
sector has a particular place in the Turkish economy, since Turkey covers an
extensive area, is surrounded by three seas and is located between Asia and
Europe.
Between 1996 and 2000, investments in the transport sector, which provided
gradually increasing contributions to the development of the Turkish economy,
gained first place among all other sectors, with a share of some 20% of total
public investment. Within the process of preparing for membership of the EU,
intensive efforts are being exerted to restructure the operating establishment
and sectors in harmony with the EU’s structural and technical norms and
policies. Our fundamental objective in this field is to provide the economic
and safe transport services that are required for economic and social
development.
There is also a necessity to provide equilibrium between various types of
transport. I therefore share the view expressed in the report that efforts to
restructure the railway system, which has the potential to provide low-cost,
fast, efficient and environmentally friendly transport, should be given
priority. In order to keep up with the current system created by globalisation,
railways should undergo a process of structural change. With a view to
improving the competitiveness of the railway sector vis-à-vis other
modes of transport, I agree that a radical policy breakthrough is needed.
In Turkey, there is also a need further to modernise and to streamline the
railway networks. Within this context, we attach particular importance to the
modernisation of the Ankara-Istanbul railway system, which will also open new
investment opportunities for outside investors. The Bosphoros tunnel railway passage
is also important, as it will provide uninterrupted railway transport between
Europe and Asia.
I also share the view, expressed in the report, that we should intensify our
efforts to reduce the number of road accidents. Education and awareness-raising
activities should be intensified in order to make the public more aware of the
dangers. In this regard, I can support the recommendation to organise a joint
European Conference of Ministers of Transport/Council of Europe conference on
road safety. With these considerations in mind, I fully support the report
prepared by rapporteur Anacoreta Correia.
Mr Mevlüt ÇAVUŞOĞLU (Turkey).
– First, I thank the rapporteur, Mr Anacoreta Correia, for his comprehensive
report.
Needless to say, transportation is an important key to economic development and
integration. The European Conference of Ministers of Transport has been
providing an important service to the European public for half a century.
Important steps have been taken but there is still room for improvement,
especially in eastern Europe, the Caucasus and the Balkans.
Turkey does about 70% of its trade with European countries and an important
part of Turkish exports and imports are sent via road and rail transport.
Therefore, it is of the utmost importance to us that secure and swift transport
is provided in eastern Europe, the Caucasus and the Balkans. Interlinked and
standardised transport services and eased customs formalities would contribute
to the economic development of all the countries concerned.
Industrialised countries should help those counties that have a limited
financial capacity to build modern transport facilities. The work undertaken
within the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe should be accelerated. In
that context, the efforts of the new Turkish Government to modernise the
Turkish rail network, which has strategic locations at the main trade routes,
should be assisted by international financial institutions.
Last but not least, on oil transport, priority should be given to pipelines,
the most environmentally friendly means of transport.
challenges
for a new agrıcultural polıcy
Mr GÜNDÜZ (Turkey). – I
thank the rapporteur for his efforts in preparing this precise and exhaustive
report, which is on a very interesting topic.
Apart from the international strategic significance of the Caucasus, the region
neighbours Turkey and for that reason the stability and welfare of the people
in it is of great interest to us with regard to our security and stability.
Turkey’s approach to the southern Caucasus is shaped by its desire to establish
comprehensive co-operation in the region with the contribution of all three
states – Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia. Turkey thinks that the consolidation
of their independence, the maintenance of their territorial integrity, the
strengthening of democratic structures and the market economy and their
economic potential are crucial. The development of cultural co-operation
between the three south Caucasus countries could be achieved with wisdom and
courage if we worked and lived together. That would eliminate the clash among
civilisations.
I stress that harmony, knowledge and welfare would be enhanced by communication
between the cultures and by providing for common understanding and dialogue.
Despite ongoing negative cases, the trend is towards conceptual definition of
“the other”, based on a value system in which “the other” is defined as someone
who has violated values by resorting to force, terrorism, occupation and
injustice as well as the negation of universal human rights.
Once mutual understanding, dialogue and co-operation are attained, that will
help our efforts to achieve harmony, peace and prosperity. In that regard, it
is important that we come together to ascertain the possible medium and
long-term problems and to seek solutions to them so that we contribute to peace
and prosperity in the region.
Mr YŰKSEL ÇAVUŞOĞLU (Turkey).
– I thank the rapporteur, Mr Floros, for his valuable work on agricultural
policy which emphasises many aspects of the subject, together with rural development
and social dimensions and expectations.
Let me give some figures from the third global environment outlook assessment
regarding the agricultural sector as a whole. There are 2,220 million
more people than there were in 1972. Around 2 billion hectares of soil,
equal to 15% of the earth’s land cover, is now classed as degraded as a result
of human activities. These figures indicate the seriousness of the
problem that the world faces today.
Ensuring a balanced agricultural development that is in harmony with the
environment in accordance with agricultural policies has become a main
priority. Sustainable production very much depends on the use of natural
resources in a rational way. Environmental degradation and resource conservation
are of increasing concern to many. Intensifying production, especially by
using chemical fertilisers, pesticides and irrigation, puts further emphasis on
the environment. It is incumbent upon countries to spare no efforts to
conserve the environment and natural resources while implementing agricultural
policies.
In Turkey, historically, the agriculture sector has been the country’s largest
employer and a major contributor to the country’s GDP, exports and industrial
growth. However, as the country has developed, agriculture has declined
in importance relative to the rapidly growing industry and service
sectors. Its share within the national income has tended to fall over
time. Let me illustrate that while its share in GDP was 35% in 1970, it
declined to 15% in 1999.
Despite agriculture’s diminished role in the Turkish economy over a period of
several decades, a great part of the population in Turkey is still earning its
livelihood from agriculture. However, the income of these people remains
extremely low, as compared to other sectors.
Today, our basic target is to establish an organised, competitive and
sustainable agricultural sector that takes into account the dimensions of
economic, social, environmental and international development as a whole.
In this context, I believe that the rural development projects are an
indispensable element of agricultural policy. Policies of agricultural
and rural development go hand in hand and are complementary to each other.
Another aspect of the development of agricultural policies should be to
establish a partnership at both local and national levels. I would like
to point out here the importance of the role of the non-governmental
organisations in this process.
Utmost importance should be given to the more efficient use of production
factors, the foremost being that of human resources. Consequently, I
would like to put a special emphasis on the importance of strengthening
institutional capacities of agricultural organisations, elimination of problems
observed within the flow of institutional services and the strengthening of
producer organisations. Efforts can also be concentrated on the efficient
use of intra-sectoral resource allocation, the increase of competitiveness of
agricultural enterprises and the development of marketing networks.
In order to increase sustainable production, importance should also be given to
research and improvement activities. Obviously, research activities
carried out by agriculture research institutions cannot but contribute to
sustainable development in the agricultural sector.
In conclusion, I can state that I support the draft resolution reflecting the
outcomes of Mr Floros’s report.
HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION
IN THE CHECHEN REPUBLIC
Mr Süleyman GÜNDÜZ (Turkey).
– I thank Mr Bindig for his factual and comprehensive report on the human
rights situation in the Chechen Republic. The Assembly has been discussing
Chechnya for a long time to no avail, with no concrete improvement in the
situation and with no committed involvement. The Bindig report makes it clear
that the picture remains dark. Mass murders, unlawful killings, disappearances,
and torture – in short, grave human rights violations – continue. It is
deplorable that the rule of law has been non-existent in a part of Europe and
that human rights are unheard of.
An atmosphere of impunity reigns in Chechnya, encouraging human rights
violations as well as denying justice to thousands of victims. Government
structures fall short of establishing the effective administrative and judicial
system that would enable protection against human rights abuses.
According to the Hasyurt agreement of 1997, both sides took the responsibility
for resolving the issue peacefully. They signed several agreements in different
fields, including customs. Russia’s second Chechen war started in 1999 and
continues at full speed. Let me list some of its results: 10 000 civilians
have been killed by indiscriminate bombardment, as has been mentioned in
reports by various respectable human rights organisations, such as Memorial,
and there has been systematic torture, humiliating and degrading behaviour,
confiscation of goods, unlawful detention, and the application of intensive
judicial punishments.
The Russian Federation’s statement that the situation in Chechnya has been
normalised is an attempt to deceive us. If it were true, why would independent
journalists and observers still not be allowed to enter Chechnya? All relevant
international organisations should examine the facts without delay. As the
standard bearer for the protection of human rights, the Council of Europe, in
particular, cannot remain indifferent to the tragic dimensions of human
suffering in Chechnya.
Bringing violators of human rights to justice is essential to achieve
reconciliation in the region. Within this framework, the European Court of
Human Rights must make the necessary arrangements to facilitate applications
from Chechnya.
I fully endorse the draft resolution and the draft recommendation. I want to
place special emphasis on paragraph 10 of the draft resolution, which foresees
the setting up of an ad hoc tribunal to try war crimes and crimes against
humanity in the Chechen Republic.
Europe
and the development of energy resources in the Caspian Sea region
|
Mr AÇIKGÖZ (Turkey). – I
would like to thank the rapporteur for his excellent work. The report
presents a broad picture of the roles played by the different actors of the
region. It draws the attention of the Council to the region’s crucial
role for European peace, security and prosperity, especially in terms of
energy supply security for Europe.
The landlocked countries of the Caspian basin aim at ensuring a sustainable
and continuous flow of revenues from exporting oil and gas to finance their
economic and social development. Thus we strongly support the request
in the draft resolution asking the Council to step up its assistance to
member states in the region.
I am also appreciative of the fact that the draft resolution rightly draws
attention to the major environmental and public safety risks posed by any
further increase in oil and gas shipments through the Turkish straits.
Given the fact that currently more than 50 million tonnes of oil and oil
products are being shipped through the Turkish straits, a potential increase
of tanker traffic in the straits will pose additional dangers and threats to
human life, the environment, property and navigation safety. Therefore,
it is of paramount importance for Turkey and the other countries concerned to
find environmentally safe routes for transporting Caspian oil.
I also share the view, as noted in the draft resolution, that it is
particularly important that Russia ratifies the 1994 European Energy Charter
as soon as possible.
Having said that, let me elaborate on the priorities of the energy
policy of Turkey and try to explain how it plays a constructive role in
meeting the needs of the landlocked Caspian countries as well as in
supporting Europe’s energy security.
The energy strategy of Turkey is multi-dimensional. On the one hand
Turkey, because of its expanding energy needs, pursues policies to ensure
diversified, reliable and cost-effective supply sources. On the other
hand, the liberalisation of the Turkish energy market is continuing.
The third aspect of its energy strategy is to become a major consumption and
transit terminal in the region. The Turkish route could be the fourth artery
of natural gas for Europe.
Turkey, straddling the Caspian basin and Europe, forms a natural energy
bridge between the source-rich countries of the Caspian basin and the energy-hungry
world markets. Due to its geographical location, and as it is the
biggest energy importer in the area, Turkey casts itself as an energy hub in
its region. As one of the biggest investors in the region, and having
close historical, cultural and economic ties with the countries of the
region, Turkey acts not only in its commercial interests, but bears the
responsibility for supporting these nations in their social and economic
development.
It is with these considerations that the east-west energy corridor project
was elaborated. The east-west energy corridor concept is mainly based
on the construction of trans-Caspian and trans-Caucasian oil and gas
pipelines traversing Georgia and ending in Turkey. The east-west energy
corridor essentially aims at transporting the Caucasian and central Asian
energy resources to the western markets through the most direct,
cost-effective, technologically and environmentally feasible and safe routes.
The transportation of Caspian oil and gas resources through multiple
pipelines will enable the European countries both to diversify and to secure
their energy supply. |
WAR IN IRAQ
Mr
LIVANELI (Turkey). – When I participated for the first time in a meeting
of the Parliamentary Assembly in January, I was much impressed by various
interventions by parliamentarians from different countries to the effect that
they were against war in Iraq. Anti-war interventions made by members of the
British Labour Party were particularly impressive. The Turkish Grand National
Assembly rejected a motion that would have opened a northern front, meaning
deployment of 62 000 American ground troops in Iraq. That also meant that
we rejected $26 billion in US aid.
Unfortunately,
the war has begun, and bombs are hurting civilians and Iraqi children more than
they are hurting the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. I wonder what position the
Council of Europe takes regarding its own member states who are participating
in the war? Many European politicians have warned that if Turkey takes part in
the war, it will not be admitted to the European Union. I accept that that is a
peacekeeping attitude, but I wonder whether the same European politicians might
envisage reconsidering the EU membership of states that are fighting in Iraq.
I
do not seek any warning or resolution from the Council today, but I do want to
draw the Assembly’s attention to Turkey’s difficult position as a neighbour of
Iraq. This cruel war threatens the future of the world. It is also provoking
confrontation between peoples of different religions and traditions, and sowing
seeds of long-lasting future conflict. Bombs are killing people and destroying
historic monuments that have existed for centuries.
As
we all know, there are worldwide protests against the aggression. Last week, I
received a picture from my dear colleague, Mikis Theodorakis, a great Greek
composer. The poster showed three girls carrying a placard at an anti-war
demonstration in Athens. On the placard was written “Christopher Columbus, damn
your curiosity”. That is a pity; as an admirer of US culture and literature, I
do not think that the US deserves that. However, growing anti-American feeling
in the world must make the Bush administration reconsider what it is doing. The
war is hurting the image of the United States more than it is hurting Iraq.
Before the war began, the US symbolised freedom and law for many millions of
people, while Saddam Hussein was the symbol of blood-thirsty dictatorship. Now,
the US is seen as an aggressor and Iraq as a victim.
Mrs
BİLGEHAN (Turkey) said that war was terrible but it was worse for the
countries involved. Turkey was particularly concerned because it had the
conflict on its doorstep. Potentially, the conflict could provoke negative
economic and civil consequences.
Turkey
had suffered bad experiences during the 1991 Gulf war and had received large
numbers of refugees. There was no state authority in Northern Iraq and that
also affected Turkey. Turkey had contributed to the attempts to prevent
military action and was now attempting to make sure that war did not adversely
affect the civilian population too much. She supported the idea that Iraq must
remain independent and that its state authority should extend to all areas. It
was desirable to see a stable democracy in Iraq, but it would have been
preferable for that to have been achieved without resorting to military action.
Mr ATEŞ (Turkey).
– I am probably the only member of this Assembly whose home is only 200 km away
from the border of Iraq. Therefore today, in my short speech, I would
like to express to you what the ordinary people in Turkey and the people in my
home town feel about the war in Iraq.
For the average Turkish citizen, war on Iraq means nothing but insecurity,
fear, terrorism and economic problems. This is understandable because the
last Gulf war had a devastating impact on Turkey.
The economic and human strife provided the terrorist secessionist groups in
Turkey with fertile ground, and growing terrorism was largely due to the
activities of militants who had crossed the borders as refugees fleeing
Iraq. Billions of dollars were lost in revenue or used up in extra
military spending to fight terrorism.
For us, the Turkish people, the present day is like watching a scary old film
again. We have no choice but to keep watching the same scary horror movie
one more time. Plus, our people, in their consciences, do not see a
justification for an act that would cause death and misery to a neighbouring
people. Scenes from the 1991 war, when children and women were killed,
are present in their memories and on their TV screens again. Despite
every peace effort, we are again faced with war on our doorstep.
Now, it is too late
for anyone to stop this war. However, I expect our Parliamentary Assembly
to play a more active and decisive role after the war in Iraq. I want to
point out some crucial issues that, hopefully, will be taken into consideration
in the post-war planning. These are the key factors that will either
contribute to the restoration of peace and security or pave the way for an
enlarged war throughout the Middle East.
First, the independence, territorial integrity, national sovereignty and unity
of Iraq should be preserved. Furthermore, the Iraqi people should be able
to determine their own future and the natural resources in Iraq should belong
to its people.
Despite our political affiliation and our country of citizenship, this is the
time for us and for Europe and its organisations to prove their unity in
helping those who are suffering the consequences of war. We must ensure
that the universal principles of humanity still exist.
|
Mr TEKELIOĞLU (Turkey). – The
world is experiencing the second war in the recent past, although its grave consequences
are very well known. The Gulf war in 1991 was followed by a ten-year
economic sanction programme that made life a struggle for survival not only
in Iraq, but in neighbouring countries. As with the previous war, again
there appears to be no announced plan for the rebuilding of Iraq politically,
socially and economically.
Therefore, it is worth questioning the purpose of a war which is presented as
a “regime change”, because action for change entails a concrete
replacement. But since there is no acknowledged plan for the aftermath
for the time being, “regime removal” would be the more accurate replacement.
These are the basic problems which should be tackled if the ultimate goal of
a prosperous, wealthy and democratic Iraq really exists. The complex
threat of ethnic and religious strife and the question of the flow of
refugees and displaced persons have the potential for devastating effects.
I would like to point out some crucial issues that, hopefully, could be taken
into consideration in the post-war planning. These key factors either
contribute to the restoration of peace and security or pave the way for an
enlarged war throughout the Middle East.
First, the independence, territorial integrity, national sovereignty and
unity of Iraq should be preserved. I believe there is no need to
reiterate the negative impacts of the political vacuum in Iraq.
Furthermore, the Iraqi people should be able to determine their own
future. The natural resources in Iraq belong to its people, of course.
The list of the above-mentioned indispensable priorities could certainly be
extended in terms of ensuring peace and stability in the region.
However, the humanitarian aspects of the war remains the most critical one.
Mr President, I would like to remind the Assembly and my colleagues that in
the Council of Europe only Turkey has a border with Iraq and more than
500,000 people fleeing from Iraq came to Turkey in 1991. They were assisted
in every way. Unfortunately, Turkey had been left alone in those most
difficult circumstances. Only 200 of them were accepted by other
European countries.
The best solution derived from this experience is to deal with the refugee
problem within Iraq before they reach the Turkish mountains. Therefore,
all the measures taken by Turkey should be assessed within this context.
Turkey has been directly and seriously affected by the Gulf war and its
aftermath during the last twelve years. Our economy has been undermined
and our security has been challenged.
We are determined to exert every effort to ensure lasting conditions of
stability, conducive to widespread human and economic development in Iraq and
in the region.
Mr MERCAN (Turkey). – Ever since the question of Iraq entered its
present phase, Turkey has been unequivocal in its commitment to the
principles which continue to govern its eighty-year relationship with its
southern neighbour.
Likewise, Turkey actively supported the wide-ranging quest for a peaceful
solution of the Iraqi crisis, and we have been at the forefront of the
regional initiatives in that vein. The Istanbul joint declaration,
carrying the signatures of the regional countries, called on the Iraqi
leadership to move irreversibly and sincerely towards assuming its
responsibilities in restoring peace and stability in the region.
Unfortunately, however, the Iraqi leadership chose to reject it.
At about the same time, our government let the Iraqi authorities at all
levels know directly of our dire assessment of the unfolding events. We
told them that Security Council resolution 1441 can in no way be construed
other than an unambiguous signal of what it said in writing.
Our efforts were geared to strengthen not the tone but the substance of the
message that these were indeed “last warnings”; that it was incumbent upon
the Iraqi leadership to do everything in its power. Despite each and
every effort, it is deplorable that we are again faced with the war at our
doorstep.
We, in Turkey deeply value our historical and cultural ties with Iraq
and its people. We are friends of the Iraqi people. What the
sincere friends have to say at times like these should be the truth: that, if
Iraq had provided the necessary co-operation in 1991, this outright conflict
would have been avoided. It is with this feeling and understanding that
we feel much regret and dismay.
Turkey is worried. We have, indeed, every reason to be worried, because
along with the people of Iraq and other neighbouring countries, Turkey and
the Turkish people are the first who have to shoulder the largest part of all
the negative burdens of the war.
In today’s world, even the talk of war is more than sufficient to cause
devastating effect on economies, let alone the war itself with all its dire,
heavy and cruel consequences.
We remember that Turkey’s resolve to act with the international community in
the Gulf war was not cost free. Throughout the last decade, my country,
for the first time in 1000 years was not able to trade with the south because
of the sanctions imposed upon Iraq.
Instead, we had to fight and lose tens of thousands of our most
promising generation in order to eradicate terrorism of the worst sort.
It should not be forgotten that it was mainly due to the power vacuum that
emerged in the northern part of Iraq in 1991 that the terrorist organisation
was able to base itself in northern Iraq to launch attacks against Turkey.
As history shows us, precarious situations such as this one provide a fertile
ground for political instabilities. This time, contrary to just after
the Gulf war, no one and no particular group should be allowed to exploit the
special circumstances that Iraq is going through now. No party should
feel that it has the upper hand to undermine Iraq’s territorial integrity and
unity.
We regard the entire people of Iraq – Arabs, Kurds, Turcomans or Assyrians –
as friends and neighbours. We support all their well-being. I cannot
but re-state and re-affirm how much we attach importance to the territorial
integrity and political unity of Iraq, as well as to defending the rights of
all its people. I believe that the future of Iraq should be determined
through the full participation and free consent of the Iraqi people as a
whole.
Inter-religious, inter-cultural co-operation and co-existence are even more
important than before. It is our duty and responsibility to prevent any
kind of hostilities among religions and ethnicities. The history
of humanity is full of examples of bloodshed in the name of religion.
It is therefore incumbent upon us to take on all necessary measures of strengthening
the harmony of civilisations. Therefore, political and social structure
which is based on democracy, secularism and the rule of law, as put forward
by my country, may constitute an exemplary role model for Muslim
countries. We believe this model is the only means to serve as a solid
basis to provide a permanent mechanism in preventing terrorism and
fundamentalism. It is exactly for this reason that Turkey’s bid for EU
membership has become even more important than ever for the security not only
of Turkey , but also of Europe and of the region as a whole.
I would like to emphasise the fact that we are very much concerned about the
plight of the Iraqi people. The war, which is devoid of international
legitimacy, has further exacerbated the already dire humanitarian conditions
of the Iraqi people, which they had to live with under the duress of harsh
economic sanctions.
Iraq should be at peace with itself and with its neighbours. It is my
conviction that it is incumbent upon Iraq to implement fully its commitments
under relevant UN Security Council resolutions.
Today, it is with a deep sense of sorrow that we follow the news of the
ongoing war in Iraq. We pray for an early end. We continue to
hope that the loss of life will be minimal.
I hope that the common wisdom will be allowed to prevail sooner rather than
later for the sake of real peace. |
SO-CALLED HONOUR CRIMES
Mrs BİLGEHAN (Turkey)
thanked the rapporteur and said the issue was worrying and complex. She
emphasised the distinction between crimes of honour and crimes of passion. She
highlighted a problem with female suicide and said that women were often given
a choice between committing suicide and being killed after they had entered
into a immoral act. Young male members of the family were often forced into
committing such crimes because their sentence would be shorter. Immigrants were
particularly vulnerable to these crimes because of their archaic traditions and
closed communities.
Turkey was aware of the serious nature of the problem and had addressed this in
1998 by creating a law. Domestic crimes and crimes of honour infringed on human
rights. In 2003, Turkey had brought in a new civil code to eliminate all
remaining discrimination against women. There had to be changes to the penal
code, but Turkey had taken significant steps towards fighting these crimes and
recognised the role of the state and the need for a multi-disciplinary
approach. Education, and raising awareness, especially among refugees, was
needed. She approved the resolution, but recognised there was still a lot more
to be done.