The New York Times - "Turkey on trial":
19 January 2006
In an absurd twist for the free-speech trial in Turkey of the author Orhan
Pamuk, Turkish prosecutors are now investigating the Dutch co-chairman of
the European Union's committee on Turkey, Joost Lagendijk, to see whether he
violated the country's gag rules while in Istanbul last month to attend the
Pamuk trial. Pamuk is charged with insulting "Turkishness" for talking
publicly about Turkish massacres of Armenians and Kurds in the last century.
The law also makes it a crime to insult the government and state
institutions.
Lagendijk spoke to reporters after the trial opened, saying among other
things that unless Turkey's Kurds engage in dialogue with the government,
they risk strengthening the army, which justifies its importance by
fighting.
That such a comment could touch off a criminal investigation - to determine
whether Lagendijk had insulted the army - is further evidence of the strains
that threaten democratic reform in Turkey and the country's chances of
joining the European Union. The same band of nationalist lawyers who filed
the initial complaint against Pamuk is behind the legal actions against
Lagendijk and is reported to be behind other recent prosecutions of writers,
journalists and intellectuals.
Turkish nationalist sentiments are grounded in a conviction that Kurdish
separatism and political Islam are mortal threats to Turkey's existence. But
in recent years, as Turks have pushed for entry into the European Union, the
government has passed many reforms, like minority rights for Kurds and
greater civilian control of the military. What's more, those reforms have
taken place under the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
whose party has roots in political Islam and who might well have been
deposed by the military in Turkey's not-so-distant past.
The law that criminalizes insults of Turkish identity and institutions is a
powerful vestige of those days, and defenders of the old status quo are
using it to push against the reformist tide. Turkish lawmakers can and
should change the law. Meanwhile, the European Union and the United States
should make it clear that reforms are more important than the old guard's
discomfort with change.
In an absurd twist for the free-speech trial in Turkey of the author Orhan
Pamuk, Turkish prosecutors are now investigating the Dutch co-chairman of
the European Union's committee on Turkey, Joost Lagendijk, to see whether he
violated the country's gag rules while in Istanbul last month to attend the
Pamuk trial. Pamuk is charged with insulting "Turkishness" for talking
publicly about Turkish massacres of Armenians and Kurds in the last century.
The law also makes it a crime to insult the government and state
institutions.
Lagendijk spoke to reporters after the trial opened, saying among other
things that unless Turkey's Kurds engage in dialogue with the government,
they risk strengthening the army, which justifies its importance by
fighting.
That such a comment could touch off a criminal investigation - to determine
whether Lagendijk had insulted the army - is further evidence of the strains
that threaten democratic reform in Turkey and the country's chances of
joining the European Union. The same band of nationalist lawyers who filed
the initial complaint against Pamuk is behind the legal actions against
Lagendijk and is reported to be behind other recent prosecutions of writers,
journalists and intellectuals.
Turkish nationalist sentiments are grounded in a conviction that Kurdish
separatism and political Islam are mortal threats to Turkey's existence. But
in recent years, as Turks have pushed for entry into the European Union, the
government has passed many reforms, like minority rights for Kurds and
greater civilian control of the military. What's more, those reforms have
taken place under the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
whose party has roots in political Islam and who might well have been
deposed by the military in Turkey's not-so-distant past.
The law that criminalizes insults of Turkish identity and institutions is a
powerful vestige of those days, and defenders of the old status quo are
using it to push against the reformist tide. Turkish lawmakers can and
should change the law. Meanwhile, the European Union and the United States
should make it clear that reforms are more important than the old guard's
discomfort with change.
In an absurd twist for the free-speech trial in Turkey of the author Orhan
Pamuk, Turkish prosecutors are now investigating the Dutch co-chairman of
the European Union's committee on Turkey, Joost Lagendijk, to see whether he
violated the country's gag rules while in Istanbul last month to attend the
Pamuk trial. Pamuk is charged with insulting "Turkishness" for talking
publicly about Turkish massacres of Armenians and Kurds in the last century.
The law also makes it a crime to insult the government and state
institutions.
Lagendijk spoke to reporters after the trial opened, saying among other
things that unless Turkey's Kurds engage in dialogue with the government,
they risk strengthening the army, which justifies its importance by
fighting.
That such a comment could touch off a criminal investigation - to determine
whether Lagendijk had insulted the army - is further evidence of the strains
that threaten democratic reform in Turkey and the country's chances of
joining the European Union. The same band of nationalist lawyers who filed
the initial complaint against Pamuk is behind the legal actions against
Lagendijk and is reported to be behind other recent prosecutions of writers,
journalists and intellectuals.
Turkish nationalist sentiments are grounded in a conviction that Kurdish
separatism and political Islam are mortal threats to Turkey's existence. But
in recent years, as Turks have pushed for entry into the European Union, the
government has passed many reforms, like minority rights for Kurds and
greater civilian control of the military. What's more, those reforms have
taken place under the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
whose party has roots in political Islam and who might well have been
deposed by the military in Turkey's not-so-distant past.
The law that criminalizes insults of Turkish identity and institutions is a
powerful vestige of those days, and defenders of the old status quo are
using it to push against the reformist tide. Turkish lawmakers can and
should change the law. Meanwhile, the European Union and the United States
should make it clear that reforms are more important than the old guard's
discomfort with change.
In an absurd twist for the free-speech trial in Turkey of the author Orhan
Pamuk, Turkish prosecutors are now investigating the Dutch co-chairman of
the European Union's committee on Turkey, Joost Lagendijk, to see whether he
violated the country's gag rules while in Istanbul last month to attend the
Pamuk trial. Pamuk is charged with insulting "Turkishness" for talking
publicly about Turkish massacres of Armenians and Kurds in the last century.
The law also makes it a crime to insult the government and state
institutions.
Lagendijk spoke to reporters after the trial opened, saying among other
things that unless Turkey's Kurds engage in dialogue with the government,
they risk strengthening the army, which justifies its importance by
fighting.
That such a comment could touch off a criminal investigation - to determine
whether Lagendijk had insulted the army - is further evidence of the strains
that threaten democratic reform in Turkey and the country's chances of
joining the European Union. The same band of nationalist lawyers who filed
the initial complaint against Pamuk is behind the legal actions against
Lagendijk and is reported to be behind other recent prosecutions of writers,
journalists and intellectuals.
Turkish nationalist sentiments are grounded in a conviction that Kurdish
separatism and political Islam are mortal threats to Turkey's existence. But
in recent years, as Turks have pushed for entry into the European Union, the
government has passed many reforms, like minority rights for Kurds and
greater civilian control of the military. What's more, those reforms have
taken place under the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
whose party has roots in political Islam and who might well have been
deposed by the military in Turkey's not-so-distant past.
The law that criminalizes insults of Turkish identity and institutions is a
powerful vestige of those days, and defenders of the old status quo are
using it to push against the reformist tide. Turkish lawmakers can and
should change the law. Meanwhile, the European Union and the United States
should make it clear that reforms are more important than the old guard's
discomfort with change.
--
E' mai possibile, oh porco di un cane, che le avventure
in codesto reame debban risolversi tutte con grandi
puttane! F.d.A
Coins, travels and more: http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/golanule/my_photos
http://gogu.enosi.org/index.html
