"kirkuk should belong to all Iraqis"

By: Hemin Hussein lihony
Now heading up Today’s Zaman, the most circulated English daily in Turkey as Editor-in-Chief, Bülent Keneþ was a news coordinator for both Zaman and Turkish Daily News in the 1990s and early 2000 before joining the semi-official Anatolia News Agency as its New York bureau chief in 2004. Before joining Today’s Zaman, he was also Editor-in-Chief of the Turkish daily Bugün. Turkey's constitutional court moved not to ban the APK. Many believe this was a deal between the military establishment and the government. What are your thoughts? Bülent Keneþ. Turkey’s Constitutional Court decided against closing down the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) after being tried for charges of having become a “focal point of anti-secular activities,” opting instead to impose partial financial penalties on the party. But this was not because of a deal between the ruling AK Party and the military. The Court’s decision is not to be applauded and poses a big threat for the future of the AK Party. Six of the court’s 11 judges voted for the party’s closure -- one vote short of the number necessary to actually close it down. Only Chief Justice Haþim Kýlýç voted against placing any sanctions on the AK Party, while four of the other judges voted to cut its Treasury aid. The decision was seen by Kýlýç as a “serious warning” to the AK Party. The verdict contained an implicit threat against the AK Party. This decision will always be wielded as a “sword of Damocles” against the party. Just after the announcement of the decision, those who were not happy that AK Party was not closed began to argue that the top court did not clear it of the charges of being “a focal point of anti-secular activities” but that, on the contrary, the court endorsed the claims raised in the indictment. While I think the decision of the top court is not correct, I believe that this interpretation of the decision is right. The Constitutional Court recognized the indictment’s claims against the AK Party but found that the evidence was not sufficient to close the party, so it chose a different punishment. Do you think the “conditional” survival of the AKP will put an end to its reformist agenda? Yes, there is such a possibility. At this point, it could be said that the decision will cause serious problems and block the reformist policies of the ruling AK Party in the mid to long term. The decision, as a kind of “yellow card,” has done serious damage to the power of the AK Party. It will always be abused by the opposition, the establishment, Kemalists, neo-nationalists and fundamentalist secularists who are against the AK Party. Thus, it will create a lack of courage and self-confidence in the ranks of the AK Party and paralyze its strength and eagerness to pursue the democratic reforms that Turkey needs. In sum, this decision completely deprived the AK Party of the power and courage to change the current Constitution, which was drafted by the military regime in 1982 following the Sept. 12, 1980 military coup d’état. As we accept that Turkey’s most essential need today is to establish a new constitution, it is the duty of AK Party to find a way to do this. No political party other than AK Party has the ability to accomplish this. So, the AK Party has no way other than calling early general elections, before which it should declare that its top priority will be to draft a new constitution when it is re-elected. I predict that with a strong promise to write a new constitution after the elections the AK Party will enjoy the support of at least 55 percent of the electorate. How do you see the Kurdish question in Turkey after the survival of the AKP? Since the AK Party has lost an important part of its power because of the decision of the Constitutional Court , its courage to seek a solution for the Kurdish question has also diminished. Despite the fact that the AK Party wishes to find a solution to the Kurdish issue, in this current atmosphere it will never dare to. AK Party’s policies to ease the problems of our Kurdish citizens have drawn ire from the establishment and the old bureaucratic elite. On the other hand, the AK Party is still very strong in the mostly Kurdish populated constituencies. If the AK Party decides to carry Turkey to new general elections together with the local elections, it could garner the power to deal with the Kurdish issue again. Otherwise, I have no hope that the AK Party government could afford to make radical reforms to ease tensions related to the Kurdish issue and the PKK. Moreover, we know that the closure of the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) is currently also before the Constitutional Court. After the closure of DTP, our Kurdish citizens will have no party to represent them other than the AK Party In fact, the AK Party is the only party which represents national unity. The AK Party won 54 percent of the votes of the Kurdish population, no other party except the DTP could manage to get votes from Kurds of Turkey. So, AK Party is a great asset for Turkey. During Erdogan’s historic visit to Iraq, why didn't he meet KRG PM Nechirvan Barzani or President Massoud Barzani? I think Erdoðan thought that such a move would harm his relations with the establishment and the military. However, I have to say that Mr. Barzani also made it difficult to assure such a meeting. Barzani’s rhetoric and actions have never been friendly towards Turkey . How could a prime minister of a country have met with a regional leader who has always targeted his country? If we have to discuss the reasons of why such a meeting could have not been held during Prime Minister Erdoðan’s visit to Baghdad, we must assess the attitude and rhetoric of Barzani, too. You said in an interview that even if there were no PKK in Kurdistan, Turkey would still not accept something called “Kurdistan.” Why? Yes, it is impossible for Turkey to accept such a term. History shows that there has always been a region called “Kurdistan” but as a geographical definition. However, we have never had a “Kurdistan” in political terms. If Kurds push for “Kurdistan” as an independent political entity, it will not be acceptable for Turkey. Turkey is very sensitive in protecting the territorial integrity of Iraq and the geographical status quo. If Kurds or other ethnic and sectarian groups in Iraq threaten Iraq’s integrity, Turkey will decisively oppose it. Kirkuk is presently the hottest topic in Iraq. The Kirkuk provincial council has decided to annex Kirkuk to the Kurdistan Region if there is not a consensual agreement in Baghdad. In your opinion, what would be the reaction of Turkey if there is no agreement between Iraqi factions? Turkey will react harshly if the Kurds annex Kirkuk. Turks think that Kirkuk is a Turkmen territory and an inseparable part of Iraq. We think that Kirkuk should belong to all Iraqis. Annexation of Kirkuk by Iraqi Kurdistan is neither acceptable for Turkey nor Iran and the Arabs. Turks see a big danger in Kirkuk if it is occupied by Kurds. It could cause a never-ending turmoil and civil warfare in Iraq .