[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 109 (Tuesday, July 31, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8452-S8456]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DIFFICULTIES IN TURKEY
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, as my colleagues are well aware, the
people of Turkey, a NATO ally, are experiencing extremely serious
economic and political difficulties.
On April 10, 2001, at the Bosphorous University in Istanbul, Turkey,
our distinguished former colleague in the House of Representatives, the
Honorable John Brademas, delivered a most thoughtful address, on this
subject, ``Democracy: Challenge to the New Turkey in the New Europe.''
Dr. Brademas' speech was sponsored by TESEV, the Turkish Economic and
Social Studies Foundation. Its contents some four months later still
resonate with timely wisdom and creative analysis.
A long-time and effective advocate of democracy and transparency,
John Brademas served for 22 years, 1959-1981, in the House of
Representatives from Indiana's Third District, the last four as House
Majority Whip. He then became President of New York University, the
Nation's largest private university, in which he served for 11 years,
1981-1992. He is now president emeritus.
Among Dr. Brademas' involvements include Chairman of the Board of the
National Endowment for Democracy, NED, from 1993-2001, and founding
director of the Center for Democracy and Reconciliation in Southeast
Europe. Located in Thessalonike, Greece, the Center seeks to encourage
peaceful and democratic development of the countries in that troubled
region of Europe.
I believe that Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives
and other interested citizens will read with interest Dr. Brademas'
significant discussion of the challenge of creating a truly more open
and democratic Turkey. I ask unanimous consent to print Dr. Brademas'
address in the Record.
[[Page S8453]]
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Democracy: Challenge for the New Turkey in the New Europe
I count it an honor to have been asked to Istanbul to
address a forum sponsored by the Turkish Economic and Social
Studies Foundation, and I thank my distinguished host,
Ambassador Ozdem Sanberk, Director of TESEV, for his gracious
invitation even as I salute the invaluable work performed by
TESEV in promoting the institutions of civil society and
democracy in Turkey.
So that you will understand the perspective from which I
speak, I hope you will permit me a few words of background.
In 1958, I was first elected to the Congress of the United
States--the House of Representatives--where I served for 22
years.
During that time I was particularly active in writing
legislation to assist schools, colleges and universities;
libraries and museums; the arts and the humanities; and
services for children, the elderly, the handicapped.
A Democrat, I was in 1980 defeated for re-election to
Congress in Ronald Reagan's landslide victory over President
Jimmy Carter and was shortly thereafter invited to become
President of New York University, the largest private, or
independent, university in our country, a position I held for
eleven years.
If I were to sum up in one sentence what I sought to do at
NYU during my service as President, it was to lead the
transformation of what had been a regional-New York, New
Jersey, Connecticut-commuter institution into a national and
international residential research university.
And I think it's fair to say that that transformation took
place, thanks in large part to philanthropic contributions
from private individuals, corporations and foundations.
Although no longer a Member of Congress or university
president, I continue to be active in a range of areas, only
a few of which I shall mention.
By appointment of President Clinton in 1994, I am Chairman
of the President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities,
a group of 40 persons, 27 from the private sector and 13
heads of government departments with some cultural program.
Our purpose is to make recommendations to the President--and
the country--for strengthening support for these two fields
in the United States--and we have done so. Four years ago,
then First Lady of the United States, and Honorary Chair of
the Committee, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and I released
Creative America, a report to the President with such
recommendations.
Among them was that the United States give much more
attention to the study of countries and cultures other than
our own, including strengthening international cultural and
scholarly exchanges. Only last Fall, I took part, at the
invitation of the then President, Bill Clinton, in the White
House Conference on Culture and Diplomacy, at which these
ideas, and others, were discussed, and I have urged the new
Secretary of State, Colin Powell, to consider ways of
implementing them.
Several days ago, in Washington, I attended a meeting of
the Advisory Board of Transparency International, the
organization that combats corruption in international
business transactions, to talk about how to expand the OECD
Convention outlawing bribery of foreign public officials to
include outlawing bribery of officials of political parties.
national endowment for democracy
And last January I stepped down after eight years as
Chairman of what is known in the United States as the
National Endowment for Democracy.
Since its founding in 1983, the National Endowment for
Democracy, or NED, as we call it, has played a significant
role in championing democracy throughout the world.
The purpose of NED is to promote democracy through grants
to private organizations that work for free and fair
elections, independent media, independent judiciary and the
other components of a genuine democracy in countries that
either do not enjoy it or where it is struggling to survive.
Two years ago, in New Delhi, India, I joined some 400
democratic activists, scholars of democracy and political
leaders from over 85 countries brought together by NED for
the inaugural Assembly of the World Movement for Democracy.
The establishment of this World Movement is inspired by the
conviction that interaction among like-minded practitioners
and academics on an international scale is crucial in the new
era of global economics and instant communications. The
Movement, we hope, can help democrats the world over respond
to the challenges of globalization.
Indeed, last November, Ambassador Sanberk and I were
together in Sao Paulo, Brazil, for the Second Assembly of the
World Movement for Democracy.
center for democracy and reconciliation in southeast europe
And I have been involved in yet another initiative related
to strengthening free and democratic political institutions.
Four years ago, a small group of persons, chiefly from the
Balkans, decided to create what we call the Center for
Democracy and Reconciliation in Southeast Europe. The
Center officially opened its offices one year ago in the
city of Thessaloniki, birthplace, as you all know, of the
great founder of the Turkish Republic, Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk. I was pleased that my friend, the distinguished
Turkish business leader, Mr. Sarik Tara, was with us on
that occasion.
The Center is dedicated to building networks among
individuals and groups working for the democratic and
peaceful development of Southeast Europe.
Chairman of the Board is a respected American diplomat,
Matthew Nimetz, who was Under Secretary of State with Cyrus
Vance and is Special Envoy for United Nations Secretary-
General Kofi Annan to mediate between Athens and Skopje. The
Center's Board is composed overwhelmingly of leaders from
throughout Southeast Europe, including Mr. Osman Kavala and
Dr. Seljuk Erez of Turkey. Ambassador Nimetz and I are the
only two Americans on the Board.
Although the Center is administratively headquartered in
Salonika, which, with excellent transportation and
communications facilities, is easily accessible from
throughout the region, the activities of the Center are
carried out in the several countries of Southeast Europe.
Last September, the Board of the Center met here in
Istanbul where Mr. Tara and other Turkish leaders graciously
received us.
Indeed, I arrived in Istanbul only last Sunday after a
meeting of the Center's Board this past weekend in
Thessaloniki. We had originally planned to gather in Skopje
but you will understand why we changed the venue!
What are we doing at the Center? Here are some of our
current projects:
JOINT HISTORY PROJECT
The Center's inaugural program is a ``Joint History
Project,'' which brings together professors of Balkan history
from throughout the region to discuss ways in which history
is used to influence political and social relations in
Southeast Europe. The scholars seek to produce more
constructive, less nationalistic, history textbooks and
thereby ultimately enhance the understanding of, and respect
for, the peoples of the region for each other--a daunting
challenge, we realize!
For it is evident in the Balkans that how history is taught
can powerfully shape the attitudes of people toward those
different from themselves. Even as the violence plaguing this
region has roots in nationalist, religious and ethnic
prejudices, cultivated, in many cases, by and based on
distortions of histories, the accurate teaching of history
can be crucial in promoting tolerance and peace.
An Academic Committee, established by the Joint History
Project, encourages exchange among scholars in participating
educational institutions. We on the Center Board hope the
Committee will establish a network among academics in
Southeast Europe as counterweight to existing nationalistic
groups within each country. So far we have organized two
seminars for young scholars and another two are being
arranged.
The Center's History Project has also begun to work with
the Stability Pact for Southeastern Europe, initiated by the
European Union and supported by the United States and other
non-EU countries in Europe. The mission of the Pact is to
extend democracy and prosperity to all the peoples of
Southeast Europe. So far, the participating governments have
pledged $2.4 billion for the initiative.
I must also cite the Center's Young Parliamentarians
Project which, through a series of seminars, enables young
MPs from Southeast Europe to join parliamentarians from
Western Europe and the European Parliament as well as
professionals, economists and journalists to discuss issues
of urgent and continuing concern in the region.
The Center last year conducted four seminars on such
subjects as the workings of parliamentary democracy, the
relationship between politics and the media, the operation of
a free market economy, and the organization of political
parties.
This year, in another project, the Center is sponsoring
seminars on reconciliation in the former Yugoslavia. Serbs
and Croats have already met in Belgrade and will meet again
next month in Zagreb. And representatives of the other
peoples of the former Yugoslavia will soon meet.
All the projects I have cited promote, by creating cross-
border contacts and stimulating dialogue, the economic,
social and political development of the Balkans. Our goal, to
reiterate, is to encourage vibrant networks of individuals
and groups with common interests and experiences.
I hope I have made clear, from what I have told you, that
in my own career, as a Member of Congress, university
president and participant in a range of pro bono
organizations, I have been deeply devoted to the causes of
democracy, free and open political institutions and
encouraging knowledge of and respect for peoples of different
cultures and traditions.
Against this background, I want now to talk with you about
the great challenge, as I see it, facing what I call ``the
new Turkey in the new Europe''--and that challenge is
democracy.
So that you can better understand my viewpoint, I must tell
you one other factor in my own experience that I believe
relevant to my comments.
greece, cyprus, and turkey
As some of you know, my late father was born in Greece, in
Kalamata, in the Peloponnesus. My late mother was of Anglo-
Saxon ancestry.
I was the first native-born American of Greek origin
elected to the Congress of the
[[Page S8454]]
United States, and I am proud of my Hellenic heritage.
In 1967, however, when a group of colonels carried out a
coup in Greece, established a military dictatorship, later
throwing out the young King, I voiced strong opposition to
their action.
I refused to visit Greece during the seven years the
colonels ruled, refused invitations to the Greek Embassy in
Washington and testified in Congress against sending U.S.
military aid to Greece.
My view was that as Greece was a member of NATO,
established to defend democracy, freedom and the rule of law,
of all of which goals the colonels were enemies, I had as a
matter of principle to oppose sending arms from my own
country to the country of my father's birth.
In like fashion, when in 1974, the colonels attempted to
overthrow Archbishop Makarios, the President of Cyprus,
triggering their own downfall and sparking two invasions by
Turkish armed forces, equipped with weapons supplied by the
United States, I protested the Turkish action, again on
grounds of principle.
For the Turkish invasion violated U.S. legal restrictions
on the use of American arms, namely, that they could be
utilized solely for defensive purposes.
Because American law mandated that violation of such
restrictions would bring an immediate termination of any
further arms to the violating country and because Secretary
of State Kissinger willfully refused to enforce the law, we
in Congress did so by legislating an arms embargo on Turkey.
I can also tell you that when my colleagues in Congress and
I who called on Kissinger in the summer of 1974 to press him
to take the action required by law, we reminded him that the
reason President Nixon, who had just resigned, was
constrained to do so was that he had failed to respect the
laws of the land and the Constitution of the United States.
So even as I opposed U.S. military aid to Greece in 1967 on
grounds of principle, I opposed U.S. arms to Turkey in 1974
on grounds of principle. You may not agree with my viewpoint
on either matter but I want you to understand it!
a new democratic turkey?
Yet I would not be here today if I did not believe in the
prospect of a new, democratic Turkey, belonging to the new
Europe, a member of the European Union and a continuing ally
of the United States.
I am well aware that Turkey is now confronted with a
profound financial and economic crisis, ``the most severe
economic crisis of its history,'' the Chairman of TUSIAD, Mr.
Tuncay Ozihlan, told a group of us in New York City last
month at a meeting with members of the Turkish
Industrialists' and Businessmen's Association. It is a crisis
that reaches all parts of the nation.
If I have one thesis to advance tonight, it is this: That
the combination of three factors make this moment one of
great opportunity for fundamental reform of the Turkish
political system and significant advance in the quality of
life of the Turkish people.
The first factor is the economic crisis. The distinguished
Turkish economist, Mr. Kemal Dervis, has, as you know, been
charged with recommending structural reforms essential if
Turkey is to win assistance from the International Monetary
Fund, the United States and other actors in the international
financial community.
Most obvious in this respect is the situation of Turkish
banks, widely understood to be afflicted by corrupt links
with the nation's political parties.
The second factor that can drive fundamental reform in
Turkey and bring the country into the modern world is
Turkey's candidacy for accession to the European Union.
Beyond the economic crisis and Turkish candidacy for entry
into Europe, there is a third factor that can make this the
time to start building a new Turkey in the new Europe.
I speak of the rising engagement in pressing for democracy
of the leaders of Turkish business and industry, of your
universities, of the media, and leaders of the other
institutions of what we call civil society.
So where are we now?
turkey and the european union
First, we can be encouraged by the approval last month by
the Turkish cabinet of the National Program for Adoption to
the Acquis of the European Union, or NPPA.
In my view, Turkish leaders of all parties should agree to
confront the problems resolution of which is necessary to
Turkish entry into Europe.
And if Turkish responses are only cosmetic, as Gunter
Verheugen, the European Commissioner in charge of
enlargement, has made clear, the candidacy will fail.
Verheugen has reminded Turkish leaders that the European
Council in December 1999 in Helsinki stated, ``Turkey is a
candidate state destined to join the Union on the basis of
the same criteria as applied to the other candidate states.''
I add that Turkey should deal with these obstacles not
solely to meet the so-called Copenhagen requirements for EU
membership but also because such action will be in the
interest of the people of Turkey.
What has impressed me greatly as I prepared for this visit
to Istanbul is the deep commitment of so many Turkish
leaders, especially in business and industry and in the
universities, to the economic and political reform of this
great country.
What are the requirements Turkey must meet to enter Europe?
Let me here remind you of the eloquent words of TESEV's
respected Director, Ozdem Sanberk, only a few weeks ago
(``It's Not the Economy, Stupid!'' Turkish Daily News,
February 28, 2001).
Commenting on the clash last February between Prime
Minister Bulent Ecevit and President Ahmet Necdet Sezer,
Ambassador Sanberk said: ``. . . You cannot reform the
economy root and branch without an equally radical reform of
the political system. . . .
``. . . [O]nly comprehensive political reform can create
the stability . . . required for long-term economic
success.''
The Ambassador then criticized the Government's failure to
undertake radical structural reform, to ``plug the leaks in
the state-owned banks, through which billions of dollars of
public money have poured. . . . No crackdown on curruption in
the highest places. No lifting of cultural restrictions on
freedom of expression. No reform of the Political Parties
Law, which might transform our parties into something more
useful than closed clubs dominated by their leaders. No
serious effort to change a constitution which does not meet
the needs of the age. . . .
``. . . The problems that lie at the root of Turkey's
current difficulties are political, not economic and
political reform can solve them. . . .''
LEADERSHIP OF TUSIAD
I find encouragement, too, at the positions taken by the
leadership of TUSIAD, Turkey's major business and industrial
organization.
Indeed, only a few days ago, in New York City, I had the
privilege of meeting several members of TUSIAD, including its
distinguished chairman, Mr. Ozihlan.
I said then, and repeat here, that I have been deeply
impressed by the high quality of the reports published by
TUSIAD and by the obvious commitment of so many leaders of
Turkish business and industry to the principles of democracy
and human rights, freedom of enterprise, freedom of belief
and opinion.
As Muharrem Kayhan, President of TUSIAD's High Advisory
Council, who was also in New York last month, has said, ``The
requisites of EU membership are exactly what Turkey needs. .
. .
``. . . TUSIAD believes that fully adopting the Copenhagen
Criteria will benefit our country. We think that the fears
expressed about the possible damages Turkey might suffer if
its special conditions are not taken into account are
exaggerated.
TUSIAD . . . consistently calls for a thoroughgoing
political reform for quite a long time. We firmly believe
that unless we change Turkey's political system, efforts to
modernize our economy will be in vain. To that end we join
the President of the Republic Ahmet Necdet Sezer, in calling
for a reform of the constitution and the rewriting of the
Political Parties Law and the Electoral Law.'' (TUSIAD)
This commitment to democracy, freedom of opinion, free
market economy, a pluralistic society, clean politics, social
development and the rule of law is, I have observed, one that
runs through TUSIAD's several studies and reports directed to
the problems that face Turkey.
Not only does TUSIAD call for action to meet the Copenhagen
criteria but do does a wide range of scholars, analysts and
officials from Turkey itself as well as from other countries.
Deputy Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz last month, in speaking
of the cabinet approval of the NPPA, said that Turkey must
give top priority to ensuring freedom of speech, cracking
down on torture, reviewing the death penalty and offering
more freedom of organization for trade unions.
So what else must be done for Turkish entry into Europe?
The European Union has also called on Turkey to grant full
cultural rights to all minorities, including allowing Turkish
citizens to speak whatever language they like. After all,
millions of the over 65 million people of this country speak
Kurdish. Why is it not possible to respond to their desire
for a degree of cultural freedom?
I was present in New York City when your Foreign Minister,
Ismail Cem, and the Greek Foreign Minister, George
Papandreou, were both honored at a dinner, a symbol of a
reapprochement between Turkey and Greece in recent months
triggered by the response in each country to earthquakes in
the other.
the cyprus issue
Here again, I have been impressed by how both Turkish and
Greek business leaders seem to be able to communicate
effectively with each other, yet another example of the
significant contribution that institutions of civil society
can make to encouraging peaceful resolution of conflict in
this troubled part of the world.
And, of course, Europe wants to see progress in resolving
the thorny issue of Cyprus. With respect to Cyprus, I could
make an entire speech tonight but I won't!
Let me say that it must be obvious that both Greek and
Turkish Cypriots perceive a problem of security, both are
unhappy with the present situation and both would like to
improve their political and economic conditions by entering
the European Union. Turkish Cypriots, moreover, have an acute
economic problem, with less than a fifth of the $17,000 per
capita GDP annually of the Greek Cypriots.
Clearly Turkish Cypriots would be the net beneficiaries of
entry into Europe but this
[[Page S8455]]
gain will come only if Cyprus is admitted as a single federal
state, bi-zonal and bi-communal.
Accordingly, if Turkish Cypriots are not to continue to be
left behind, economically and politically, the only sound
answer is for Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots to accept the
United Nations Security Council resolutions calling for such
a settlement.
For as The Economist has written, Cyprus represents ``the
main block of Turkey's hope of joining the European Union in
the near future.''
I turn to another matter that is clearly of concern to the
European Union, the role of the armed forces in the political
system of Turkey.
Now, of course, for decades, the principal link between the
United States and Turkey has been strategic, specifically,
military. In light of the geographical location of Turkey,
the size of its armed forces and its population, such a
relationship should not be surprising. Turkey is a major
actor on nearly every issue of importance to the United
States in this part of the world, including NATO, the
Balkans, the Aegean, Iraqi, sanctions, relations with the
states of the former Soviet Union, turmoil in the Middle East
and transit routes for Central Asian oil and gas.
the role of the military in turkish politics
Yet it must be obvious to any thoughtful observer that of
particular importance in opening the doors to Europe for
Turkey is that steps be taken to curb the influence of the
military in politics.
I am certainly aware of the respect and admiration the
Turkish people have always had for their armed forces.
Nonetheless, any serious student of the place of the military
in Turkish life learns very quickly that its role extends far
beyond defense of the security of the Republic.
Here, rather than using my own words, let me cite those of
a distinguished Turkish journalist, Cengiz Candar:
``Unlike Western armies, the Turkish military is
politically autonomous and can operate outside the
constitutional authority of democratically elected
governments. It can influence the government both directly
and indirectly, controlling politicians according to its own
ideas and maxims. . . .
``The National Security Council is the institution that
really runs the country. . . . ''
``. . . [T]he military has become the power behind the
scenes that runs Turkish politics. . . .
``. . . The military is able to intervene at will in
politics, not only determining who can form governments, but
actually exercising a veto over who can contest elections. .
. .'' (``Redefining Turkey's Political Center,'' Journal of
Democracy, October 1999, Vol. 10, No. 4)
A powerful analysis of the role of the military in Turkish
politics is to be found in an essay published last December
in the influential journal Foreign Affairs by Eric Rouleau,
French Ambassador to Turkey from 1988 to 1992. (``Turkey's
Dream of Democracy,'' Foreign Affairs, Vol 79, No. 6,
November/December 2000)
Said Rouleau, commenting on Turkey's candidacy for the EU,
``Turkey today stands at a crossroads,'' and explains that
``The [1999] Helsinki decision [of the EU] called on Turkey,
like all other EU membership candidates, to comply with the .
. . Copenhagen rules [requiring] EU hopefuls to build
Western-style democratic institutions guaranteeing the rule
of law, individual rights, and the protection of minorities.
Indeed, the EU's eastern and central European candidates
adopted most of the Copenhagen norms on their own, before
even knocking at the doors of the union.''
Rouleau then asserts that the Copenhagen criteria
``represent more than simple reforms; they mean the virtual
dismantling of Turkey's entire state system . . . which
places the armed forces at the very heart of political life.
Whether Turkey will choose to change . . . a centuries-old
culture and . . . practices ingrained for decades--and
whether the army will let it--remains uncertain. Even EU
membership, the ultimate incentive, may not be enough to
convince the Turkish military to relinquish its hold on the
jugular of the modern Turkish state.''
Rouleau then describes the ways in which the National
Security Council (NSC) operates and notes the objections of
the EU to the military's budgeting, its ownership of
industries, its own court system and, above all, the
military's dominance over civilian authority.
Concludes Rouleau: ``Turkey's EU candidacy has crystallized
the way in which two very different visions of the country
are now facing off. . . . On the one side stands the Turkey
of . . . the `Kemalist republicans,' those who see the
military as the infallible interpreter of Ataturk's legacy
and the sole guardian of the nation and the state. . . .
``On the other side stand . . . the `Kemalist democrats' .
. . proud of the revolution carried out by the founder of the
republic eight decades ago, but a the same time . . . believe
that the regime should adapt to modernity and Western norms.
This group includes intellectuals . . . business circles . .
. and . . . Kurds and Islamists hopeful that Brussels will
ensure that their legitimate rights are recognized and
guaranteed.''
TUSIAD FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORM
What, I must tell you, seems to me a particularly
significant statement about the place of the military is the
following sentence, under the heading, ``Democratization and
the Reform Process in Turkey,'' in the document prepared for
the visit of the TUSIAD Board of Directors to Washington, DC,
and New York last month (``TUSIAD Views on Various Issues''):
``8. National Security Council (NSC) should be eliminated
as a constructional body and its sphere of activity be
restricted to national defense.''
While one group of TUSIAD leaders was in the U.S., speaking
in Paris at the same time at a panel sponsored by Le Monde,
was Dr. Erkut Yucaoglu, former TUSIAD Chairman. Here are his
words:
``. . . TUSIAD has been in the forefront of the struggle
for political reform in Turkey. . . . Our report on
democratization challenged the most sacred tenets of the
existing order in the country, be it freedom of expression of
all sorts, the role of the National Security Council, or
private broadcasting in all languages, or the political
parties law. We have consistently defended the integration
with the EU and called for a speedy implementation of the
Copenhagen criteria without reference to Turkey's special
conditions. . . .
``. . . It is no secret . . . that the Turkish political
system as it is presently functioning is in a crisis, perhaps
a terminal one. The political parties have lost the
confidence of the public a long time ago. . . .
``By now, every thinking person in Turkey knows that if the
country wishes to fulfill its own promise of greatness and
become prosperous, the political system must change . . . .''
Dr. Yucaoglu went on to praise the President of the
Republic as ``a national leader'' who enjoys `'the support of
an overwhelming percentage of the population, who is
committed to Turkey's European vocation. Mr. Sezer stands for
the rule of law, civilian supremacy, anti-corruption,
integration with the globalizing world and perhaps most
important, for an unfettered democracy. . . .''
Now I am aware that I have spoken to you very candidly
about the challenges--and opportunities--Turkey faces as your
country moves into the 21st century.
You will observe, however, that most of the voices I have
cited that are pressing for reform in Turkey are Turkish!
I certainly don't want to suggest that we in the United
States have a perfect political system. As you know, far too
few of our eligible citizens bother to vote, and the scramble
for money to finance our political campaigns is an ongoing
threat to the integrity of American democracy. Even now,
Congress is acting on measures to reform campaign financing.
Moreover, as you are all aware, the Presidential election
in my country last year was finally determined by our Supreme
Court in a decision that has caused leaders of both our
Democratic and Republican Parties to call for reform of our
election laws.
I have noted that the election of President Sezer seems to
be regarded by Turkish champions of democracy as a great
victory. Like the leaders of TESEV and TSIAD, I have also
been impressed by President Sezer's commitment to the rule of
law and to rooting out corruption, and by all accounts,
President Sezer has won the confidence of over 80% of the
citizens of Turkey.
I have said that the combination of the current economic
crisis, Turkish candidacy for entry into the European Union
and the increasing influence of the leaders of civil society
make this a moment of extraordinary opportunity for the
people of Turkey.
So now let me say some words about civil society.
civil society and democracy
What do we mean by the term?
Civil society is the space that exists between, on the one
hand, the state--government--and, on the other, individual
citizens. This space is where citizens act with one another
through non-governmental organizations (NGOs), foundations,
and independent media
For as I am sure you will agree the state cannot--and
should not--in any country do everything.
Indeed, I believe it significant that last year German
Chancellor Gerhard Schroder, as you know, a Social Democrat,
declared:
``One of the great illusions of Social Democratic policies
has been the idea that `more state' guarantees more justice.
However, providing or even extending the `classical' means of
state intervention--law, power, and money--can no longer be
considered sufficient solutions for a society where movement
`has become as important as regulation' (Alain Touraine). .
. .''
Added Schroder, ``Subsidiarity, giving responsibility back
to those who are willing and capable of assuming this
responsibility, should not be understood as a gift from the
state, but, rather, as a socio-political necessity.'' (``The
Civil Society Redifining the Responsibilities of State and
Society,'' Die neue Gesellschaft, No. 4, April, 2000,
Frankfurt.)
For the health of democracy, then, we must strengthen the
institutions of civil society.
foundations in turkey
What is the state of civil society in Turkey today, on non-
governmental organizations, or as we say, NGOs?
Now I do not pretend to be an expert on NGOs in Turkey. But
I understand that there are some 75,000 private associations
registered in Turkey including more than 10,000 nonprofit
foundations. Some foundations make charitable donations to
NGOs and individuals; others are so-called ``operating
foundations'' which provide social services and
[[Page S8456]]
support education and research. (``Human Rights and Turkey's
Future in Europe,'' by Aslan Gunduz, Orbis, Vol. 45, No. 1,
Winter 2001, p. 16.)
Of these 10,000 foundations, nearly half were started in
only the last 30 years.
Of course, Turkey has a long history of philanthropic
foundations. During the Ottoman Empire, many of the services
the state now provides, in health care, education and city-
planning, were financed by foundations. (Davut Aydin,
unpublished book chapter.)
I am sure that you here can tell me how NGOs gained a new
prominence in Turkey through their effective relief work
after the earthquake.
But you also know that NGOs have often faced intense
scrutiny, and sometimes harassment, from the government. So I
cannot emphasize enough the importance of philanthropic
support from the business community in sponsoring NGO
activities.
Last year, by the way, I delivered a speech in Athens in
which I sharply criticized the Greek law that imposes a 20%
tax on philanthropic contributions, reduced by half in the
December 2000 budget but still an anomaly in a land that gave
us the word philanthropia.
I hope that Turkish law will include further incentives to
create foundations and expand the services they provide.
NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY IN TURKEY
I can also tell you that the National Endowment for
Democracy, which, as I have said, I chaired for several
years, has supported several non-governmental organizations
in Turkey. I'll say something about a few to illustrate the
kinds of civil society groups--and their activities--that
contribute to a strong democracy:
First, I note that the Center for the Research of Societal
Problems, (TOSAM), founded by Professor Dogu Ergil, has been
a NED grantee since 1997.
An NGO called the Foundation for Research of Societal
Problems (TOSAV) was established in 1996 to explore possible
solutions to the Kurdish issue. After TOSAV published a
Document of Mutual Understanding on possible peaceful
solutions, TOSAV's founders were brought to trial at State
Security Court and the document was banned.
To continue their work, TOSAV members established TOSAM,
which produces Democracy Radio, broadcasting bi-weekly
programs on such themes as democracies and minorities, the
role of the media in a democracy, and the relationship
between central and local government.
The Helsinki citizens' Assembly--Turkey (HCA--Turkey) has
been a NED grantee since 1997.
Founded in 1990, HCA is an international coalition that
works for the democratic integration of Europe and on
conflict resolution in the Caucasus and the Middle East.
HCA--Turkey was established by jurists, human rights
activists, mayors, trade unionists, journalists, writers and
academics.
HCA brings together representatives of civil society
organizations from different cities, legal experts, academics
and representatives of municipalities to develop and advocate
an agenda for reform of the law governing NGOs in Turkey.
Women Living Under Muslim Law--Turkey (SLUML--Turkey) has
been a recipient of NED grants since 1995. Founded in
December 1993, this NGO provides information and advice to
women's organizations throughout the country. WLUML-Turkey
sponsors a project to train social workers, psychologists and
teachers from community centers throughout Turkey in
conducting legal literacy group sessions for women.
An active civil society, then, provides a check on a
powerful state. For in a genuine democracy, non-governmental
associations have the responsibility of keeping a close eye
on the operations of government. So you and I know that if
governments, in order to discourage or eliminate criticism,
seek to crush free and independent newspapers, radio and
television, or to control NGOs, democracy will be gravely
weakened.
education crucial to future of turkey
It will not surprise you, given my history in Congress and
as a university president, that I believe a key ingredient of
civil society, fundamental to the success of democracy and a
modern economy, is education.
Certainly, education is crucial to the future of Turkey,
where 30% of the population is below the age of 15! (``EU-
Turkey Relationship: Less Rhetoric, More Challenges,'' by
Bahadir Kaleagasi, Private View, No. 9, Autumn 2000, p. 22.)
Although I am a strong champion of both state and private
support of education, I must note the growth in recent years
of private universities in Turkey. As one who helped raise
nearly $1 billion in private funds for New York University, I
am impressed that several of your private universities have
been founded with the generous support of Turkish business
leaders. I think here particularly of Bilkent University,
Sabanci University and Koc University.
I add that I have myself accepted the invitation of one of
Turkey's outstanding business leaders, Mr. Rahmi Koc, to
serve on the Board of Friends of Koc University, an American
foundation chaired by the respected Turkish-American founder
of Atlantic Records, and a good friend, Mr. Ahmet Ertegun,
even as I have agreed to serve on the Board of Anatolia
College in Thessaloniki. And I am pleased that these two
institutions are cooperating in a joint training program.
These universities also make an important contribution to
emerging civil society in Turkey. Founded through acts of
philanthropy and charging tuition fees, they teach students
that there can be institutions, independent of the state,
serving social needs.
And as I speak of universities, let me say that while it is
imperative that the United States and Turkey maintain their
strategic alliance, I would very much like to see our
relationships broadened to include expanded educational and
cultural links. For most Americans, even educated ones, don't
know very much about Turkish history or culture.
I shall add that in respect of another important question
affecting U.S. policy toward Turkey, Turkish relations with
Greece, I have for several years now proposed that Turkish
universities establish departments of Greek studies and Greek
universities create department of Turkish studies, the better
for each society to understand the other.
As I conclude his talk, I realize that I have certainly not
covered every subject relevant to my central thesis. I have
not attempted to be exhaustive; I hope I have been
instructive.
historic opportunity for democracy in turkey
My thesis is straightforward. It is that there are three
powerful developments that, it seems to me, provide an
historic opportunity for genuine democratic advance in
Turkey.
The first is the economic and financial crisis that your
country is now facing.
The second is Turkey's application for membership in the
European Union.
And the third is rising importance of the institutions of
civil society in Turkish life.
I have drawn particular attention to the movement for
democratic change-for freedom of expression, a free market
economy and reform of the political system-pressed by the
business leaders of Turkey, like those at TESEV and TUSIAD.
Although the friends of Turkey in my own country and
elsewhere will do what we can to encourage reform, for your
great country to become a vigorous and vibrant democracy is,
in the final analysis, up to the people of Turkey.
____________________