Something changed forever after in Turkey on March 14, 2003, the day Recep Tayyip Erdoğan came to office in Ankara. Tall and charming, young, conservative, eloquent and charismatic, the new Prime Minister was a breath of fresh air for the Turkish public. Only 49 at the start of his tenure, the former Mayor of Istanbul and leader of the Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi (Justice and Development Party, AKP) was faced with an immediate challenge, being the US war on Iraq, which started the same month as his assumption of power and led to a series of negative impacts throughout the world.

Turkey had always been a strategic ally for the United States. It helped the Americans combat communism during the Cold War. After 9-11, it used its strong influence in the Muslim World to combat
Islamic fundamentalism and terrorist groups like al-Qaeda. Now, as the case since the late 1970s, Turkey faces a serious challenge, stemming from PKK terrorists launching military attacks on Turkish territory from northern Iraq.

In October 2007, PKK terrorists launched an operation within Turkey, killing 17 Turkish troops. The Turkish Prime Minister summed it up with two words, “I am very angry!” With 100,000 troops stationed on the border with Iraq, Prime Minister Erdoğan is ready to launch an offensive on PKK terrorists, having recently received a mandate to do so from the Turkish Parliament. Everybody within Turkey, both his supporters on the Turkish street and opponents in the secular military establishment, are united behind their Prime Minister in his war with the PKK. Before going into a war, however, that would disrupt the relatively stable district of northern Iraq, Erdoğan is willing to give diplomacy a last chance. He heads off to Washington DC to meet US President George W. Bush on November 5, 2007, calling on the Americans to take action against the PKK, a military group that is branded as terrorist by the US, the EU, and NATO.

Prime Minister Erdoğan was born in Kasımpaşa, Istanbul in 1954. He studied at Istanbul Imam Hatip High School and the Faculty of Economics at Marmara University, playing semi-professional football during his youth at a local club for 16-years. During late 1970s, Erdoğan worked for Istanbul’s municipal transport company, the IETT. He became active in politics with the National Salvation Party (Milli Selâmet Partisi).

Turkey witnessed political tensions during the late 1970s, which were particularly marked by right-wing and left-wing armed con_licts that led to the 1980 Turkish coup d’état. After the coup d’état, Erdoğan left the IETT and worked in the private sector. He served in the Turkish Army in 1982 and re-entered politics through the Refah Party. By 1985, Erdoğan had become party chairman of the Istanbul Province and in 1991, was voted into the Turkish Parliament. By 1994, he became Mayor of Greater Istanbul and President of the Greater Istanbul Metropolitan Council. As Mayor of Istanbul, he made a name for himself as a populistic, effective administrator, building the city’s infrastructure and transportation grid, putting great efforts into beautifying the city.

In 2001, Erdoğan co-founded the AKP Party, which emerged with a historical victory in the 2002 elections, taking 34.3% of the votes. Thanks to Erdoğan it won an overall majority in the Grand National Assembly. His greatest legacy is a booming economy. Average growth rate became 7.3% and per capita income almost doubled, thanks to his reform process.

Prime Minister Erdoğan spoke to Forward Magazine about Turkey’s relations both with Syria and the United States. He outlined his nation’s policy on the PKK, the war on terror, membership in the EU, and finally, its stance vis-à-vis the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC).

The common threat of chaos in Iraq has brought you into an automatic alliance of interests with both Syria and Iran. Please describe your relations with Syria and Iran?
Turkey enjoys good relations with the regional countries including Syria and Iran. This is a natural consequence of Turkey’s multi-dimensional foreign policy in the region which can be described as constructive engagement. The situation in Iraq is a source of serious concern not only for Turkey, but Syria, Iran and the rest of the region as well. With this understanding, Turkey spearheaded a ‘neighboring countries process’ that evolved into a useful international instrument to bring stability and security to Iraq. Syria is an important neighbor of Turkey. We share our longest border with Syria. There are a centuries-long common history and cultural affinity between us. We enjoy overlapping interests for the maintenance of peace and stability in the region. We view Syria as a country that offers a lot for peace and stability in our region. To our satisfaction, our relations with Syria are following a developing trend. Intensified high level visits have been instrumental in achieving this outcome. H.E Bashar al-Assad’s recent visit to Turkey has been remarkable in showing the strong desire that both Turkey and Syria have to further their relations to the benefit of the Turkish and Syrian people and the region as well. By virtue of geography, Turkey is bound to live side by side with Iran. Despite occasional ups-and-downs, a stable climate has prevailed between Turkey and Iran for nearly four centuries.

Today, relations between Turkey and Iran are based on the fundamental principles of non-interference in internal affairs, good-neighborliness and security cooperation. Especially, our commercial and economic relations have gathered pace. At a time when the Middle East is passing through a turbulent period, consultation between our countries has become all the more important. In this respect Syria’s positive contributions are important for the solution of regional problems. In view of its strong determination to eradicate terrorism, Turkey is willing and ready to cooperate with any actor in the fight against PKK.

Turkey has been very vocal in its criticism of PKK activity in northern Iraq against Turkish territory. Your administration has threatened, on several occasions, to use military force to put an end to the PKK. What would happen if these terrorist acts continue?
Our concerns regarding the presence and activities of the PKK/KONGRA-GEL terrorist organization in northern Iraq has been conveyed on every occasion to the Iraqi government and the Multi National Force that is responsible for security in Iraq, as well as the US authorities in this context. The terrorist organization acquires weaponry and explosives, raises _inance through illegal activities, and perpetrates terrorist attacks against civilians and Turkish
Security Forces by in_iltrating through
our borders. The presence of the PKK
in northern Iraq threatens not only
Turkey but also territorial integrity of
Iraq and thus, the stability and security
of the region.
Turkey wishes to enhance its good
neighborly and friendly relations
with Iraq. Turkey also supports the
territorial integrity of Iraq and would
like to see the dif_iculties that the
Iraqi people face be overcome. In
this context, Turkey will convene the
Expanded Meeting of the Foreign
Ministers of the Neighboring Countries
of Iraq in Istanbul on 2-3 November.
However the terrorist threat against
Turkey stemming from Iraqi territory
constitutes an obstacle in furthering
our relations. Moreover, Iraq has the
obligation to prevent these terrorist
attacks under the relevant UN Security
Council resolutions. Our Government
shows every political and diplomatic
effort in combating terrorism. In this
regard we have carried out bilateral
and trilateral meetings with the Iraqi
and US authorities since 2003. Recently
the Agreement on Combating terrorism
between our Government and the
Iraqi Government was signed on 28
September 2007, in Ankara.
The patience of the Turkish people has come to its limits due to the losses we
suffer as a result of the PKK terrorist attacks. Fighting the PKK terrorist
organization which caused the death of 35.000 people in the past 23 years
is a priority of our government. In light of our past experience in combating
terrorism, we take all possible measures like any other State who has the
responsibility of protecting its citizens. Our government has the strength of
taking all measures as such, including a cross border operation.
Although the US labels PKK as a ‘terrorist organization’ it has done nothing to halt their activities. Why is that?
The USA has been our ally and a strategic partner for 50 years. We have
extensive cooperation with the USA in the _ield of counter terrorism and security cooperation. In this framework, our global cooperation in the _ield of combating terrorism continues. These
relations, which are based on common values and shared ideals for more than
half century, have strategic importance for the preservation of peace, stability
and security in this part of the world.

Our relations with the United States, coupled with our quest to join the EU,
are part and parcel of our Western orientation since the foundation of
our Republic in 1923. In the course of history, there have been occasional ups
and downs in this relationship, but as I have pointed out earlier, thanks to our
commitment to those common values such as democracy, human rights,
rule of law, free market economy, and our mutual faith in this relationship,
we were able to prevail numerous challenges in the past, and rejuvenate
it. With the same understanding, determination and will, I believe the
two countries will also be able to thwart the threat directed to relations from the
draft resolution before the U.S. Congress and the PKK terrorism originating from
northern Iraq. The USA, acknowledges the seriousness of the terrorist threat
of PKK/KONGRA-GEL targeting our country and the right of our country
to defend itself against this threat. Efforts are being made to enhance our
cooperation with the USA on the basis of securing stability in our region and
long term gains in countering terrorism as well as providing for ending PKK
terrorism against our country. On the other hand, due to the conditions in
Iraq, it is not possible to conclude that Iraq successfully _ights against the PKK
terrorism stemming form North of Iraq.
What is the ‘roadmap’ for Iraq for the immediate future? How can this wartorn country move forward?
We are entering a crucial phase in the already critical stage in Iraq. Apparently,
Iraq will remain in the forefront of the international agenda. Currently, there
appears to be some encouraging gains in the security _ield in Iraq. We must
help the Iraqi government to build the new political institutions on these gains
with an intent to achieve a nationwide reconciliation and an atmosphere of
security, where all Iraqis can freely enjoy their indispensable rights. It
is the time to set things right and make sure everyone focuses on how
to get Iraq back on its feet. Political reconciliation at a national level should
be what efforts of the international community focus on. In this context,
UNSC Resolution 1770 signi_ies the role of the UN as the main instrument
for this purpose. We have always voiced our support for the UN to play a central
role in political reconciliation in Iraq. It is with this understanding that we have
given full support to UNSC Resolution 1770.
What about Turkey’s application to
join the EU? Do the Prime Minister
and President Gül still have hope,
especially after the victory of French
President Nicolas Srakozy? Is such
a dream still reasonable? And what
can Turkey do to either win France’s
blessing, or avoid its veto?
To recognize that the process of
Turkey’s accession to the European
Union is on the right track, one must

appreciate the philosophy of the
Union. After all, the EU is a set of
ideals and values, rather than a simple
congregation of personalities where
their political priorities can reign over
established rules. We have embarked
on the road to full membership with
our EU partners with the common
objective of full membership. This
aim has been con_irmed at the highest
level on 3 October 2005 with the
unanimous decision of EU Foreign
Ministers within a shared objective
of full membership. Political agendas
and perceptions change with time.
Those who have witnessed various
phases of Turkey-EU relations know
that perceptions on both sides have
changed considerably. However,
changing these perceptions does not
depend only on Turkey. Especially,
uncontrolled public statements
made against Turkey’s membership
or proposals for alternative kinds of
partnership do not help the efforts in
this respect. Turkey’s membership to
the EU will demonstrate that different
cultures with varying traditions can
accommodate globally recognized
values and principles. It will solidify
Turkey’s role as a bridge between East
and West. Our membership will not
only promote intercultural dialogue
but also help to further improve
the existing political and economic
relations between Europe and its
vicinity. In this regard, I would like to
underline importance of the Alliance
of Civilization project we co-sponsored
with my Spanish counterpart Mr.
Zapatero under the UN umbrella;
because Turkey’s membership to the
EU will in the mean time show us that
the Alliance of Civilizations as the most
signi_icant global peace project of our
century can indeed become true.
Do the Turkish people still want to reach a hand out to Europe? Aren’t they fed up and angry with the sluggish process and European conditions?
We are not as concerned about the
pace of the accession process as we are
about the quality of that process. Time
and again we have said that we have no
qualms about achieving membership
in short order. Certain negative
statements against Turkey’s EU
membership have created a frustration
in Turkish public. We think that there are wrong perceptions about the realities of Turkey’s accession which lead to fears in a number of European countries. Major responsibility here lies on the political elites of these countries. In order to dispel the existing prejudices and misperceptions, it has become increasingly important for public opinions in the EU and Turkey to gain a better understanding and knowledge of each other. Civil society dialogue is important in this respect. The more we give substance to and expand this dialogue, we will achieve positive results. On the other hand, we are happy to see that eminent European politicians, businessmen and intellectuals have strong arguments against the concerns and doubts on the membership of Turkey. I would like to underline the fact that presenting the potential, merits or shortcomings of Turkey in a fair and objective manner is essential in order to reach a sound conclusion at the end of these discussions. In this respect, what we expect from the EU is not to discourage Turkey on its path of full alignment with democratic standards. This process is not an easy task. The EU
should choose integration with Turkey not as a requirement but as a historical
responsibility. Responsibility towards all peoples of Europe.
What about the future of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). You are known to be a strong supporter of its cause. Can TRNC survive like this for long, with one ally in the world, being Turkey? Can it continue to live off Turkish tourism, banking, and aid? At one point, will Turkey say? “I am unable to offer more!” what would TRNC do in such case?
Turkey’s policy on Cyprus is a national policy that will be pursued with determination. Therefore, Turkey will continue to render its unconditional and full support to the Turkish Cypriots until a just and comprehensive settlement is reached on the island. As is known, the Cyprus question has been on the agenda of the UN for over 40 years. The Turkish position vis-à-vis the comprehensive solution is crystal clear. Turkey wants a just and durable solution, under the auspices of the good-of_ices mission of the UN Secretary-General and on the basis of the long established UN parameters namely, bi-zonality, political equality with equal status and a new partnership state. In fact, the Turkish Cypriot people have shown their determination to this end in the referendum on the UN Comprehensive Settlement Plan. Consequently the Turkish Cypriots maintained their positive attitude. It is clear to us that the Greek Cypriot side does not want a “Settlement Plan” that might come out of a process under the UN. The Greek Cypriot rejection of the Annan Plan testifies to this fact. The continuation of the forty-year long isolation imposed on the Turkish Cypriots is not only unjustly punishing the side that approved the settlement Plan, but at the same time is reinforcing a feeling of disappointment and frustration in Northern Cyprus.
In conformity with the resolutions adopted by various international organizations and the resolutions of the Organization of Islamic Countries all countries are expected to closely associate themselves with the Turkish Cypriots and increase their relations with them in all fields. The Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers repeatedly called for the elimination of restrictions isolating the Turkish Cypriots and enhancing the relations with them in all fields. Former UN Secretary-General Anan, in his report of 28 May 2004, has made a strong call to the international community for the elimination of restrictions isolating the Turkish Cypriots, his call was endorsed by the current UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon.

• Sam Dalla: Was the Chinese model that good?
• Assad appoints a 29-member Constitutional Committee, for a new constitution by next February

• Assad appoints a 29-member Constitutional Committee, for a new constitution by next February
• Sam Dalla: Was the Chinese model that good?

• Assad appoints a 29-member Constitutional Committee, for a new constitution by next February
• Sam Dalla: Was the Chinese model that good?

• Assad appoints a 29-member Constitutional Committee, for a new constitution by next February
• Sam Dalla: Was the Chinese model that good?